perceptions of e-learning by management trainees in a

University of Arkansas, Fayetteville University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

ScholarWorks@UARK ScholarWorks@UARK

Graduate Theses and Dissertations

12-2018

Perceptions of E-learning by Management Trainees in a Small, Perceptions of E-learning by Management Trainees in a Small,

Fast Food Restaurant Fast Food Restaurant

Anthony A. Longo University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd

Part of the Adult and Continuing Education Commons, and the Online and Distance Education

Commons

Citation Citation Longo, A. A. (2018). Perceptions of E-learning by Management Trainees in a Small, Fast Food Restaurant. Graduate Theses and Dissertations Retrieved from https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/3062

This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected].

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd?utm_source=scholarworks.uark.edu%2Fetd%2F3062&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/1375?utm_source=scholarworks.uark.edu%2Fetd%2F3062&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages



https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/3062?utm_source=scholarworks.uark.edu%2Fetd%2F3062&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]

Perceptions of E-learning by Management Trainees in a Small, Fast Food Restaurant

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Education in Human Resource and Workforce Development Education

by

Anthony Longo

University of Memphis

Bachelor of Professional Studies in Organizational Leadership, 2010


Master of Professional Studies in Human Resource Leadership, 2012


Master of Business Administration in Business Administration, 2017

December 2018

University of Arkansas

This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council.

__________________________________

Jules Beck, Ph.D.

Dissertation Director

__________________________________

Vicki Dieffenderfer, Ph.D.

Committee Member

__________________________________

Kenda Grover, Ed.D.

Committee Member

Abstract

Small businesses account for a majority of U.S. jobs and play a vital role in the economy.

However, the survival rate for small businesses is disconcerting. Only half of the small

businesses will survive five years or more and one-third ten or more years. Fast food restaurants

are part of the food and drinking industry. It is the second largest industry in the United States

and the most vulnerable to business failure. Research has shown the capabilities of small

business managers can play a significant role in the success or failure of a small business, but

little research has been done on the use of E-learning in acquiring those capabilities. The purpose

of this qualitative study was to investigate the perceptions of E-learning of management trainees.

The research sample consisted of ten management trainees at a fast food franchise in Memphis,

Tennessee. The findings suggest that prior experience had little to no influence on E-learning

perception, hands-on or on-the-job training is the preferred method of learning, learner

preparation and support were inconsistent, and some trainees had no idea and others only

guessed why E-learning was being used. The overall assessment of the E-learning training was

that participants found value in it, but many learner engagement improvements are needed.

Based on the study findings, there needs to be a proactive effort by organizations and training

staff to address the engagement and E-learning adoption issues when management trainee

preferred learning style is hands-on learning.

Acknowledgements

I want to thank Jeremy Wolfe for his inspiration on how an acknowledgments section

should be done. You have five minutes for this quiz. Plagiarism is frowned upon. There may be

more than one answer per question. Go!

1) Dr. Dieffenderfer is first on the acknowledgment quiz because: a) she can eliminate seemingly

overwhelming obstacles and make everything “Alright, Alright, Alright” with a simple phone

call or email b) she makes time for her students, even when she has none to spare c) she is a

credit to the department and university, and any student who does not have her on their

committee is doing themselves a disservice d) she is a ninja

2) I want to thank the other outstanding members of my committee _________ for their help,

guidance, and most importantly, friendship throughout this entire process. a) Dr. Jules Beck b)

Dr. Kenda Grover c) John Daly d) Ryan Mallett

3) I want to thank _______ for their occasional support, nagging, and groans at the idea of

having to say Dr. before my name. a) Gwen Longo b) Lilly Longo c) Abel Smith d) Allison

Longo e) Pam and Jay Gay and Ken and Pam Longo (Dad likes the name Pam), collectively “the

parents” f) Don and Ellyn (with a Y) Wounsch

4) Thanks to _______ for always being a great friend, cheerleader, sounding board, and

proofreader to many exciting papers. a) Poppy Seelbinder b) Ike Seelbinder c) Puffin the Puppy

d) The Jeanice

5) Thanks to my coworkers and friends at _________ for always allowing me to conduct

research at the company, believing in the value of my projects, and being supportive of my ideas,

even the wild ones. a) SMPO Properties b) Sonfish, LLC (Captain D’s), c.) Wayne Enterprises,

d.) Nakatomi Trading Corp.

5) The Walton family is on this list because: a) There is only one answer needed. They helped

create some of the most impressive mountain bike trails in the country for NW Arkansas. It made

every trip to campus a little less productive but so worth it. Keep up the excellent work.

Dedication

This dissertation is mostly dedicated to me for all sacrifices I made. However, these

vampires of time and money, Gwen, Abel, Lilly, and Allison, are a close second. Gwen, you are

a role-model to Lilly and Allison of what a strong woman should be. Your endless energy,

patience, and ability to be the glue that keeps things from falling apart is nothing short of

miraculous. Abel, my son, you are barely passing school, cannot hold a job, and, as a senior,

have no idea what you are doing with your life. Here is a secret, I was in the same boat at your

age, and much like me, I believe you will be writing one of these dedications in your not too

distant future. Lilly, your strong will is “challenging” at times, scratch that, all the time, but it is

what makes you an unstoppable force in accomplishing whatever goals you set and whatever

dreams you chase. I continue to be inspired by what you can accomplish when you set your mind

to it. Allison, with your larger than life personality, it is hard to believe you started out life at

only 3 pounds. You have inspired all of us to fight harder, love longer, and appreciate every

moment of life. You remind us of the teachings of the great philosopher Joe Dirt, “you can’t

have no in your heart.”

Table of Contents

Chapter One .................................................................................................................................... 1

Background ................................................................................................................................. 2

Problem Statement ...................................................................................................................... 4

Purpose Statement ....................................................................................................................... 5

Research Questions ..................................................................................................................... 5

Significance of the Study ............................................................................................................ 5

Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................................... 6

Human Capital Theory ............................................................................................................ 7

Technology Acceptance Model .............................................................................................. 8

Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 9

Definition of Terms................................................................................................................... 10

Chapter Two.................................................................................................................................. 13

Small Business .......................................................................................................................... 14

European Union .................................................................................................................... 14

Canada................................................................................................................................... 15

United States ......................................................................................................................... 16

Published Research ............................................................................................................... 17

Economic Impact .................................................................................................................. 18

Small Business Training ....................................................................................................... 19

Barriers to Small Business Training ..................................................................................... 20

Human Resource Development ................................................................................................ 23

E-learning .................................................................................................................................. 24

History of E-learning ............................................................................................................ 25

Types of E-learning............................................................................................................... 28

Advantages ............................................................................................................................ 29

Challenges ............................................................................................................................. 30

TAM and E-learning ............................................................................................................. 30

Restaurant Industry ................................................................................................................... 31

Fine Dining ........................................................................................................................... 32

Casual Dining........................................................................................................................ 32

Fast Casual ............................................................................................................................ 33

Quick Service Restaurant or Fast Food ................................................................................ 33

Summary ................................................................................................................................... 35

Chapter Three................................................................................................................................ 36

Research Paradigm.................................................................................................................... 36

Rationale for a Qualitative Study .............................................................................................. 37

Rationale for a Case Study ........................................................................................................ 38

Participants ................................................................................................................................ 39

Ethical Concerns ....................................................................................................................... 39

Data Collection ......................................................................................................................... 40

Role of the Researcher .............................................................................................................. 40

Trustworthiness ......................................................................................................................... 41

Credibility ............................................................................................................................. 42

Transferability ....................................................................................................................... 43

Dependability ........................................................................................................................ 43

Confirmability ....................................................................................................................... 43

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 44

Coding ................................................................................................................................... 45

Assumptions .............................................................................................................................. 46

Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 47

Delimitations ............................................................................................................................. 47

Declaration of Potential Bias .................................................................................................... 47

Chapter Four ................................................................................................................................. 49

Description of the Sample ......................................................................................................... 49

Summary of the Findings .......................................................................................................... 51

Detailed Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 52

Theme 1: Design and Content Influence on E-learning Perception ..................................... 52

Theme 2: Hands-on is the Preferred Method of Learning .................................................... 54

Theme 3: Learner Preparation and Support was Inconsistent .............................................. 55

Theme 4: Why is E-learning Used ........................................................................................ 57

Theme 5: Assessment of the E-learning Training................................................................. 59

Theme 6: Engagement Improvements Needed ..................................................................... 60

Summary ................................................................................................................................... 63

Chapter Five .................................................................................................................................. 64

Summary of the Findings .......................................................................................................... 64

Theme 1: Design and Content Influence on E-learning Perception ..................................... 65

Theme 2: Hands-on is the Preferred Method of Learning .................................................... 65

Theme 3: Learner Preparation and Support was Inconsistent .............................................. 66

Theme 4: Why is E-learning Used ........................................................................................ 66

Theme 5: Assessment of the E-learning Training................................................................. 67

Theme 6: Engagement Improvements Needed ..................................................................... 67

Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 68

Implication of the Findings for Practice ................................................................................... 68

Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................................... 70

Summary ................................................................................................................................... 71

References ..................................................................................................................................... 72

Appendix A: Invitation to Participate ........................................................................................... 85

Appendix B: Informed Consent .................................................................................................... 86

Appendix C: IRB Approval .......................................................................................................... 89

Appendix D: Interview Protocol and Questions ........................................................................... 90

Appendix E: Published Research .................................................................................................. 93

Appendix F: Advantages of E-learning ........................................................................................ 95

Appendix G: E-learning Challenges ............................................................................................. 97

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 15

Table 2 .......................................................................................................................................... 17 Table 3 .......................................................................................................................................... 34 Table 4 .......................................................................................................................................... 37 Table 5 .......................................................................................................................................... 50

Figure 1 ......................................................................................................................................... 45

1

Chapter One

Introduction

The capabilities of the small business manager can play a significant role in the success

or failure of a small business (Knotts, Jones, & Udell, 2003; Watson, 2010). Unfortunately, only

about half of all small businesses survive five years or longer and only about one-third survive

ten years or longer (The U.S. Small Business Administration, 2016). The challenges of a

weakened economy (Kim & Upneja, 2014), unique organizational culture and structure, and

changing business environment (Koutroumanis, Alexakis, & Dastoor, 2015), all pose

survivability obstacles that small business managers must address to avoid failure.

The current small business atmosphere has evolved through technological innovations, an

increase in cultural diversity, and globalization (Holtzman & Kraft, 2011; Mulin & Reen, 2010).

While this environment poses new challenges for small businesses, research has continually

shown a positive correlation between training and the ability of employees to handle and adapt to

those changes (Admiraal & Lockhorst, 2009). Previously, small businesses have faced training

barriers such as lack of time, resources, planning, and relevant courses (European Commission,

2003; Storey & Westhead, 1997). However, E-learning has provided a cost-effective (Kumar &

Gulla, 2011), flexible (Hamid, 2002), and consistent (Benninck, 2004) means for small business

manager development and training (Long and Smith, 2004).

The small business manager needs a variety of competencies to be successful in an ever-

changing business environment, especially in the highly competitive restaurant industry. The

survival rate of restaurants is the lowest of all small businesses (Kim & Upneja, 2014), yet they

are virtually ignored in the literature (Chen & Elston, 2013). The limited resources available for

training and development for those competencies have made small restaurants more susceptible

2

to business failure (Parsa, Self, Sydnor-Busso, & Yoon, 2011). E-learning has provided an

economical solution for small restaurant business managers to acquire the competencies for

success and mitigate some of the risks of business failure. As small businesses continue to invest

already scarce resources in E-learning for their training and development needs, this study seeks

to investigate the perceptions of E-learning by management trainees in a small, fast food

restaurant.

Background

Small businesses in the United States are significant drivers of economic growth, job

creation, wealth, and the embodiment of the “American Dream” (The U.S. Small Business

Administration, 2016; Mills, 2011). In 2013, The Small Business Administration estimated that

there were “28.8 million small businesses that accounted for 99.7% of U.S. employer firms,

33.6% of known export value ($471 billion out of $930 billion), 48.0% of private sector

employees (57 million out of 118 million employees), and 41.2% of private-sector payroll” (The

U.S. Small Business Administration, 2016, p. 1). These small businesses are not only an

important economic engine driving the economy, but they also play a significant role in

innovation, equal opportunity, exports, and the production of 16 times more patents per person

than larger firms (Kobe, 2007; Yallapragada & Bhuiyan, 2011; The U.S. Small Business

Administration, 2014). Also, small businesses account for over 97 percent of all exporters (Kobe,

2007) and employ a proportionally greater number of workers who are 65 and older, are

disabled, and are rural workers (Headd, 2010). The importance of small business to the U.S. is

more than simply fulfilling the “American Dream.” It is the backbone of jobs, equal opportunity,

economic innovation, and is vital to the nation’s success.

3

The restaurant industry is part of the food services and drinking places industry,

according to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). This industry is

comprised of almost 600,000 Food Services and Drinking Places (NAICS 722), employing over

11 million people, making it the second largest industry in the United States (U.S. Bureau of

Labor Statistics, 2017). Over ninety percent of these establishments - almost nine million - are

small businesses with 100 or fewer employees (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016).

The current survivability rate for small businesses is not positive for future entrepreneurs

or economic recovery. Currently, only about half of all small businesses survive five years or

longer and only about one-third survive ten years or longer (The U.S. Small Business

Administration, 2016), and the survivability rate of restaurants is the lowest of all small

businesses (Kim & Upneja, 2014). The impact on the economic growth and recovery of the

economy from small business failures can be seen through an increase in the unemployment rate,

decrease in innovation, reduction in exports, and the increase of the prime interest rate, making

small business success an essential component to continued economic recovery (Valdiserri &

Wilson, 2010; Yrle, Hartman, & Yrle-Fryou, 2000).

The success of a small business is dependent on its ability to be flexible and to respond

quickly with innovative solutions to customers’ needs and changes in the external environment.

Thus, a small business must have employees with the capabilities to respond quickly with

innovative solutions to problems. Investment in human capital is a proven way for small

businesses, especially those in highly competitive environments, like fast food, to increase their

competitive advantage and help avoid business failure (Chen, 2010). Such investments in human

capital create competitive advantage by increasing employee productivity through improved

4

efficiency, fewer mistakes (Sveiby, 1997), improved manager competency, knowledge, and

skills that lead to product improvements and development (Day, 1994; Gould, 2009).

While the benefits of a well-trained workforce are numerous, small businesses encounter

many challenges in the training and development of employees and managers. Small businesses

face barriers such as idle productivity, limited resources and funding, lack of planning, and few

relevant formal courses (Beaver & Lashley, 1998; Hankinson, 1994; Storey & Westhead, 1997).

E-learning addresses the time and funding concerns since it can be delivered anytime and

anywhere at a reduced cost, compared to traditional training. E-learning addresses the lack of

planning and relevant course concerns because of an ever-expanding library of modules that

allow for a large variety of subjects that can be taken on-demand without much planning.

Investment in small business managers’ capabilities can play a significant role in the

success or failure of a small business (Knotts, Jones, & Udell, 2003; Watson, 2010). While there

have been studies conducted on the impact of small business manager capabilities on the success

or failure of a small business, only a small number has focused on how they acquire these

capabilities, and even fewer specifically on the role of E-learning in their training. Since small

businesses are an essential component of the national economy and business closures negatively

affect the economic recovery, the aim of this research is to provide another resource that may

help to increase small, restaurant business survivability.

Problem Statement

Small businesses are highly susceptible to business failure, with restaurants having the

highest failure rate of all small business types (Kim & Upneja, 2014; The U.S. Small Business

Administration, 2016). Small business managers can play a significant role in the success or

failure of small businesses, making their training and development crucial to not only business

5

owners, but the economy as a whole (Knotts, Jones, & Udell, 2003). E-learning has given small

businesses the tools to provide greater access to information, to assist managers in being

accountable for training goals, to increase manager competence, to reduce training costs, and to

contribute to the competitive advantage of the organization (Blocker, 2005). Despite the cost and

time advantages of E-learning, it still requires the use of scarce resources to be invested in

training and development of managers and inefficient use of these resources could have grievous

consequences on small business survivability.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this qualitative research study is to investigate the perceptions of E-

learning by management trainees in a small, fast food restaurant. Management trainees were

interviewed using face-to-face, semi-structured, open-ended questions to get the most detail out

of each participant.

Research Questions

This study will address the following research questions:

1. What are the perceptions of E-learning by management trainees in a small, fast food

restaurant?

2. How does the preferred method of training affect perceptions of E-learning?

Significance of the Study

Small businesses are the backbone of the U.S. economy, making their survivability vital

to the continued economic recovery of the nation (Chow & Dunkelberg, 2011). Investments in E-

learning have contributed to small business success through competitive advantages from

process improvements, access to new markets, and management competencies (Apulu &

6

Latham, 2011; Knotts, Jones, & Udell, 2003; Taylor, 2013). E-learning adoption by management

employees can be a significant factor in the success or failure of a small business.

The findings of this study may help develop a greater understanding of the factors that

contribute to E-learning adoption by examining fast food restaurant management trainees’

perceptions of their E-learning training. A greater understanding of E-learning by managers may

allow human resources practitioners, business owners, and E-learning developers to take

corrective actions to enhance adoption or maintain current methods to ensure acceptance. The

more that is learned about manager perceptions, the better that E-learning systems can be

developed for current and future manager training and development initiatives. If managers are

resistant to the adoption of E-learning, the learning may not be sufficient and used to its full

potential (Allen & Seaman, 2013). The continued investment of already scarce resources in an

inefficient or ineffective program could be detrimental for small restaurant businesses.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework is based on two critical theories found during the literature

review, Human Capital Theory and the Technology Acceptance Model. First, Human Capital

Theory postulates that investing in people will provide a return to the business (Sweetland, 1996)

and a small business owner must subscribe to this concept before even considering investing

resources in management training. Second, once the commitment to invest in E-learning is made,

the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) helps predict how well it will be received by the

managers by measuring perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use (Davis, Baagozzi &

Warshaw, 1989).

7

Human Capital Theory

Schultz (1961) devised the concept of human capital to help explain how there can be a

growth in income despite lack of growth in natural resources. His idea was that the value of an

investment in people as resources was responsible for that difference. Much like Human

Resource Development (HRD), Human Capital Theory has gone through different attempts to

define it by numerous scholars since Schultz (1961). Nafukho, Hairston, & Brooks (2004)

summarize the different definitions as

the main outcome from investment in people is the change that is manifested at the

individual level in the form of improved performance, and at the organizational level in

the form of improved productivity and profitability or at societal level in the form of

returns that benefit the entire society (p. 549)

This all-encompassing definition does well to include all parts, but simply put: ‘investing

in your people makes them more productive.'

The investment in people through education is consistently addressed throughout Human

Capital Theory literature (Sweetland, 1996). The investment in increasing the knowledge, skills,

and attitudes of the workforce in return for increased productivity is one of the KSA

relationships that makes Human Capital Theory appealing to organizational leaders. If the idea of

investing in employees of an organization through training may make them more productive

starts to sound familiar, that is the foundation of much of Human Resource Development. At the

beginning, the concept of Human Capital Theory was met with much of the same skepticism as

HRD, but through the work of such scholars as Pascarella & Terenzini (1991), empirical

evidence of the shared idea of HRD and Human Capital Theory, investing in people is investing

in one’s business was being proved as more than a theory.

8

Technology Acceptance Model

The Technology Acceptance Model focuses on the technology-driven training system of

the human capital investment. Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1989) put forth a revised model of

the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to help predict and explain users’ acceptance of

certain information systems. According to the model, the perceived usefulness and perceived

ease of use are keys to the users’ acceptance of the technology. Perceived usefulness is where a

user believes that his or her work efficiency may be increased by the new technology; and,

perceived ease of use is where a user believes he or she will not be required to put in a great deal

of effort to use the technology.

Davis et al. (1989) made some assumptions about the Technology Acceptance Model that

include:

• the technology user calculates the costs and benefits of his or her actions in a rational way

• external variables predict the use of technology only through their impact on the

perceived use and perceived ease of use

• the technology user is rational and uses information in an organized way

(Burton-Jones & Hubona, 2006; Davis et al., 1989)

The Technology Acceptance Model has been empirically tested and proven over the

years in numerous studies and has been an invaluable reference when looking at the success rate

of computer system implementations (Park, Nam, & Park, 2008). In recent years, the prevalent

use of E-learning in higher education, corporate universities, and small business training created

some concern among scholars and practitioners about how the Technology Acceptance Model

was being applied. Roca and Gagné (2008) answered these questions with their empirical testing

of E-learning and the Technology Acceptance Model. They found the Technology Acceptance

9

Model could be successfully applied to E-learning scenarios. Tselios, Daskalakis, and

Papadopoulou (2011) expanded on the work of Roca and Gagné (2008) by examining the use of

the Technology Acceptance Model under blended E-learning scenarios. Again, they found

success with using the Technology Acceptance Model under blended learning and E-learning

scenarios. Park, Nam, and Cha (2011) explored how to successfully apply the Technology

Acceptance Model to the next evolution of E-learning, mobile learning or m-learning. They

found similar success in the predictive abilities of the Technology Acceptance Model with m-

learning as previously mentioned E-learning and blended learning scholars.

Summary

Small businesses are significant drivers of the United States economy through their

innovations, exports, and provision of the majority of jobs (Chow & Dunkelberg, 2011; Thornton

& Byrd, 2013; U.S. Small Business Administration, 2016). However, small businesses are highly

susceptible to business failure, with restaurants having the highest failure rate of all business

types (Kim & Upneja, 2014; The U.S. Small Business Administration, 2016).

The capabilities of the small business manager can play a significant role in the success

or failure of a small business (Knotts, Jones, & Udell, 2003). According to Blocker (2005), the

training and development of small business manager’s capabilities through E-learning has given

small businesses the tools to provide greater access to information, hold managers accountable

for learning, increase manager competence, reduce training costs, and contribute to the

competitive advantage of the organization.

This aim of this study was to provide another resource that may help to increase small,

restaurant business survivability. The problem addressed during this study was to address the

lack of knowledge about fast food restaurant management trainees’ perceptions of their E-

10

learning training. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with the management trainees using

semi-structured and open-ended questions to probe and reveal rich detail about each of their

experiences. The results of the study provided an in-depth understanding of the small, fast food

business managers perceptions of E-learning.

Definition of Terms

Business failure: When a business cannot meet its financial obligations and is facing imminent

closure or bankruptcy (Boettcher, Cavanagh, & Xu, 2014).

Business success: When a business survives beyond five years and is profitable.

Competencies: Observable and measurable knowledge, skills, and attitudes critical to effective

job performance (Kyndt & Baert, 2015).

Competitive Advantage: The capability of the business to outperform the competition, resulting

in customers receiving a benefit they cannot get from the competition (Solomon, Marshall, &

Stuart, 2011).

E-learning: The dissemination of educational materials in an electronically facilitated

asynchronous and/or synchronous way (Garrison, 2011). It is an electronic medium to deliver

learning or education (Agourram, Robson, & Nehari-Talet, 2006).

Employee: “a person in the service of another under any contract of hire, express or implied,

oral or written, where the employer has the power or right to control and direct the employee in

the material details of how the work is to be performed” (Muhl, 2002, p. 3).

Face-to-face training: Training that is conducted by an instructor in person and in real time.

Human Resource Development (HRD): “the process of facilitating organizational learning,

performance, and change through organized (formal and informal) interventions, initiatives,

11

and management actions for the purpose of enhancing an organization’s performance capacity,

capability, competitive readiness, and renewal” (Gilley & Maycunich, 2000, p. 6).

Training and Development: “The process of systematically developing work-related

knowledge and expertise in people for the purpose of improving purpose” (Swanson and Holton,

2001, p. 357)

Small Business: The definition of small business can come from a variety of sources. The

United States Small Business Administration defines a small business as having fewer than 500

employees and various revenues depending on the industry classification (SBA, 2016). The

European Commission defines a medium business as fewer than 250 employees and less than 50

million euros in revenue, a small business as fewer than 50 employees and less than 10 million

euros in revenue, and a micro business as fewer than ten employees and less than two million

euros in revenue (EU Commission, 2003). A final source of definitions is based on previous

small business research conducted.

Small Business Administration (SBA): “The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) was

created in 1953 as an independent agency of the federal government to aid, counsel, assist and

protect the interests of small business concerns, to preserve free competitive enterprise and to

maintain and strengthen the overall economy of our nation” (SBA Mission Statement, 2017)

SME: Acronym for small and medium-sized enterprise. This term is often used interchangeably

with “small business.”

Technology acceptance model (TAM): An information technology theory developed by Davis

(1989) that exhibits how users come to accept and use technology, in this case, E-learning.

QSR Magazine. “QSR magazine is the leading sources of news and information about the $300

billion limited-service restaurant industry. For 20 years, QSR has defined this market, which

12

includes traditional fast food, fast-casual dining, coffee, snacks, full-service takeaway,

concessions, convenience stores, and related segments of the foodservice industry” (QSR

Magazine, n.d.)

13

Chapter Two

Literature Review

Chapter two contains a review of literature related to the understanding of small, fast

food restaurants, their use of E-learning, and manager perceptions of E-learning. The two main

areas of focus will be on small business and E-learning. Other critical areas of interest are

Human Resource Development and the restaurant industry. This chapter will begin with a review

of the literature on the challenges of trying to define a small business, its role in economic

development, and the employee training practices and challenges. The next section will cover the

broad concepts of Human Resource Development followed by a review of E-learning including

the history, the different types, models, advantages, challenges, effectiveness, and finally, future

directions. A broad overview of the restaurant industry and a literature review summary will

conclude the chapter. This literature review will form the foundation on which this study will

take place.

A preliminary review of the literature will include human resource development-specific

journals, small business-specific journals, E-learning-specific journals, practitioner human

resource development journals, Google Scholar, and databases (PsycINFO, Science Direct,

EBSCO HOST, Wiley Online Library, and ProQuest) using the search terms: e-learning,

electronic learning, ICT, training, human resource development, small business, small-medium

sized enterprise, and SME (the acronym of small and medium-enterprise). The results yielded a

limited amount of human resource development data for small businesses. Of this data found, an

even smaller portion made mention of E-learning, and a limited amount of this data was

conducted in the United States.

14

Small Business

The lack of a universal definition for small business among governments and researchers

has created significant comparability challenges. The European Commission (2003), The

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2017), and the majority of published

research identifies three main categories under the small business umbrella: a micro firm with ten

or fewer employees, a small firm that has ten to forty-nine employees, and a medium-sized

enterprise with fifty to two-hundred forty-nine employees (European Commission, 2003; The

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2012). In addition to employee size,

the annual turnover/balance sheet requirements vary among them and impact their qualification

for micro, small, or medium business status. An outlier, Innovation, Science and Economic

Development Canada (2016), defines the term small business using only two categories and

expands the number of paid employees from 249 to 499. It defines a small business as a firm

with 1 to 99 paid employees, a medium business with 100 to 499 paid employees, and anything

over 500 paid employees as a large business. Another exception, The U.S. Small Business

Administration (2016), casts a much broader net by classifying all small businesses under one

category and defining them as an “independent business having fewer than 500 employees and

caps on their revenue based on their classification code in the North American Industry

Classification System (NAICS)” (The U.S. Small Business Administration, 2016, p. 1).

European Union

The European Commission defines an enterprise as “any entity engaged in an economic

activity, irrespective of its legal form. This includes, in particular, self-employed persons and

family businesses engaged in craft or other activities, and partnerships or associations regularly

engaged in an economic activity” (European Commission, 2003). These small and medium

15

enterprises are further defined using three major categories including micro, small, and medium-

sized businesses. The small and medium business criteria also depend on either the turnover or

balance sheet of the business. Eurostat, the office of statistics for the European Union, has

published definitions of both turnover and balance sheet to eliminate any ambiguity in

determining micro, small, and medium-sized business status. Eurostat defines turnover as “the

total of all sales (excluding VAT) of goods and services carried out by the enterprises of a given

sector during the reference period” and balance sheet as a variable that “consists of the sum of all

items of the assets side or the sum of all items of the liabilities side” (Eurostat, 2017). Table 1

gives the variables to determine the sizing classification of medium, small, or micro businesses.

Table 1

EU SME Classification

Company Category Employees Turnover |or| Balance Sheet

Medium-Sized < 250 ≤ € 50 m ≤ € 43 m

Small < 50 ≤ € 10 m ≤ € 10 m

Micro < 10 ≤ € 2 m ≤ € 2

Note. Reprinted from Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 Concerning the Definition

of Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises by European Commission (2003). Retrieved from

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reco/2003/361/oj

Canada

Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) (2016) uses paid

employees as the primary criteria for small business or small and medium-sized enterprise

(SME). ISED defines an SME as having 1 to 499 paid employees. SME criteria are individually

broken down into two categories. A small business is defined as having 1 to 99 paid employees,

a medium sized business as having 100 to 499 paid employees, and a large business as having

500 or more paid employees (ISED, 2016).

16

United States

The United States Small Business Administration (SBA), a department of the United

States government set up to aid small businesses, defines a small business as “an independent

business having fewer than 500 employees with caps on their revenue based on their relevant

classification code in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)” (The U.S.

Small Business Administration, 2016, p. 1). The Food Services and Drinking Places sector, for

example, has caps of $7.5 million for most restaurant classifications, but with a range of all the

way to $38.5 million. Regardless of the NAICS revenue cap, the maximum number of 500

employees is constant. The other departments of the U.S. government refer to the SBA

guidelines in combination with their respective NAICS codes as a reference for what classifies as

a small business. Thus, making the SBA the agency that is most responsible for defining small

business in the U.S.

A notable exception to the small business definition in The United States is the

Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act did not use the SBA small business size

guidelines of fewer than 500 employees and NAICS revenue ceiling, and its definition is vital to

what reporting and regulations small businesses must adhere. On March 23, 2010, Congress

passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and it was signed into law by President Obama. The

Affordable Care Act was a piece of legislation that provided a series of comprehensive health

insurance reforms for Medicare, Medicaid, and private healthcare insurers. Also, the legislation

created a significant amount of regulation and reporting requirements for both large and small

17

private business. SEC. 1304 42 U.S.C. 18024 differs from the SBA by defining a small business

as:

a small employer in connection with a group health plan with respect to a calendar year

and a plan year as an employer who employed an average of at least 1 but not more than

100 employees on business days during the preceding calendar year and who employs at

least 1 employee on the first day of the plan year

(Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, 2010, § 10104)

Published Research

The majority of researchers did not explicitly define a small business but used the number

of employees and annual sales as criteria for a small business in their study sample. However, the

most common criteria used in determining a small business was the number of employees. Table

2 presents some of the most cited small business articles in the United States and the criteria used

to classify each as a small business.

Table 2

Small Business Research in the United States

Year Author(s) Country Number of

Employees

Revenue Industry

1993 Lyles,

Baird,

Orris, &

Kuratko

United

States

< 500 1 million or

more

Retail,

professional/technical

services, food

service, and

construction

2004 Ibrahim,

Angelidis,

& Parsa

United

States

< 500

2011 Hargis &

Bradley

United

States

< 250 Retail,


services, food

service, and

construction

2013 Allen,

Ericksen, &

Collins

United

States

< 200 For-Profit Basic services,

professional services,

retail, construction,

and manufacturing

18

Economic Impact

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are significant drivers of economic growth,

social cohesion, job creation, and wealth across the globe (Ram & Edwards, 2010; Chow &

Dunkelberg, 2011). While acknowledging there is no agreed-upon definition of SME among

governments, combined global statistics show that firms classified as SME’s makeup 99 percent

of businesses that account for the majority of employment, and over half of the value added in

the global economy (APEC, 2011; OECD, 2017; SBA, 2016).

European Union. Across the EU28, SME’s are geographically scattered throughout all

of Europe and operate in a variety of sectors such as retail, construction, manufacturing, and

agriculture. In 2015, SME’s numbered almost 23 million, 99.8 % of all businesses that employed

90 million people and accounted for two-thirds of employment (Hope, Gagliardi, Marzocchi,

Muller, Devnani, Peycheva, & Julius, 2015). These 23 million businesses generated almost three

fifths, €3.9 trillion, of value added in the EU28 non-financial business sector (European

Commission, 2016).

Canada. In 2015, SME’s accounted for 99.7 percent of employer businesses in Canada.

Of these SME’s, 97.9 percent were small businesses, 1.8 percent were medium-sized businesses,

and the final .3 percent were large businesses (ISED, 2016). SME’s employed over 10.5 million

people, or 90.3 percent of the total private workforce (ISED, 2016). SME’s were responsible for

27 percent, or $13 billion, of innovation expenditures on research and development between

2011 and 2013. In 2014, SME’s were responsible for approximately 30 percent of the gross

domestic product of their province (ISED, 2016). In 2013, 73,000 SME’s accounted for 25.2

percent, 106 billion, of exported goods (ISED, 2016).

19

United States. In 2013, The United States shared similar small business statistics to the

European Union and Canada. The Small Business Administration estimated there were “28.8

million small businesses that accounted for 99.7 percent of U.S. employer firms, 33.6% of

known export value ($471 billion out of $930 billion), 33.6% of known export value ($471

billion out of $930 billion), 48.0% of private-sector employees (57 million out of 118 million

employees), 41.2% of private-sector payroll, and 37 percent of high-tech employment,” (The

U.S. Small Business Administration, 2016, p. 1).

Small Business Training

Research has demonstrated that innovation is key to successfully maintaining competitive

advantage and surviving economic downturns (de Kok, Deijl, & Veldhuis-Van Essen, 2013).

SME’s are structured to be innovative, nimble, and flexible, but they must develop their

employees and managers' capabilities and skills to be successful (Reich & Scheuermann, 2003).

The training and development of employee and manager skills and capabilities are not just

crucial for innovation and the creation of knowledge, but research has shown that training and

business productivity are positively correlated (Blundell, Dearden, Meghir, & Sianesi, 1999;

Konrad & Mangle, 2000). Also, training can aid in employees’ abilities to adapt to change

(Admiraal & Lockhorst, 2009). Researchers, small business advocacy organizations, and

governments around the globe have been united in their message of the importance of employee

training and development in SME’s and its impact on innovation and productivity, resulting in a

competitive advantage (Ashton & Felstead, 1995).

Competitive advantage is the capability of the business to outperform the competition,

resulting in customers receiving a benefit they cannot get from the competition (Solomon,

Marshall, & Stuart, 2011). The competitive advantage for small businesses created through the

20

training and development of its employees results in an increase in productivity, innovation, and

the ability to adapt to change (Admiraal & Lockhorst, 2009; Konrad & Mangle, 2000; de Kok et

al., 2013). Research has shown that competitive advantage built on employee skills and

capabilities is harder to identify and duplicate by the competition and thus create a more

sustained competitive advantage (Lubit, 2001; Stalk, Evans, & Shulman, 1992).

Barriers to Small Business Training

Despite the empirical evidence and urging of researchers, small business advocacy

organizations, and governments that invest in training results in increased competitive advantage

through higher productivity, innovation, and flexibility, many small businesses have yet to

subscribe to the benefits of a well-trained workforce (Blundell, Dearden, Meghir, & Sianesi,

1999; Conti, 2005; Konrad & Mangle, 2000). Stone (2010) found that over a third of SMEs

lacked any formal training programs. The third of SMEs not engaging in training and

development programs are at a significant disadvantage in the global economy compared to their

counterparts who are. Among some of the most cited reasons for the lack of formal training in

SMEs are:

• Attitude of the Business Owner (Zhang, Macpherson, & Jones, 2006)

• Lack of Perceived Value or Relevance (Pauselli & D'Atri, 2001)

• Lack of Infrastructure (Johnson, 2002)

• Costs (Webster, Walker, & Brown, 2005)

• Lack of Time (Webster et al., 2005)

Attitude of the Business Owner. The literature has identified several barriers to training

and development for SMEs, but the attitude of the owner has been identified as the most critical

factor (Gray & Mabey, 2005; Zhang, Macpherson, & Jones, 2006). Owners who do not believe

21

in the value of training and development will not seek out opportunities for themselves or their

employees (Webster et al., 2005). Goolnik (2002) found that owner attitudes and actions towards

training and development are influenced by their competitors. Some small business owners do

not see the benefits of training and development because they are not looking to expand their

business. Instead, such owners, often referred to as lifestyle owners, are in business to only

support themselves, their families, and their employees. Collinson and Quinn (2002) proposed

that some owners are forced into becoming lifestyle owners because they lack the capabilities to

grow their business and the training barriers to obtaining those skills are overwhelming. Becton

and Graetz's (2001) revealed that over two-thirds of participants felt that it was problematic to

gain access to training and development opportunities.

Lack of Perceived Value or Relevance. The perception by many training providers is

that small businesses are just miniature versions of their larger counterparts (Rowden, 1995).

However, training materials that are pertinent to large businesses are not relevant for most small

businesses (Pauselli & D'Atri, 2001). The lack of relevant courses and clear training objectives

enforces the perception by many small business owners that there is no added value in training

and development activities (Devins, Gold, Johnson, & Holden, 2005; Reich & Scheuermann,

2003). Even when courses are small business focused and have clear objectives that align the

training with business objectives, another barrier is that most training programs do not lead to

industry-recognized certification or a college degree. A study by Collins and Buhalis (2003) of

SMEs in five European countries found that not achieving industry-recognized certifications or a

college degree was a barrier to training.

Another barrier is “just-in-time training,” in other words, training that is focused on

issues or problems that are occurring in the present and not at some point in the future (Webster

22

et al., 2005). The ability to be flexible and react quickly to changes in the business environment

is a strength of small businesses, but not training for future problems and focusing on what is

happening currently can be problematic for the long-term survivability of small businesses

(Reich & Scheuermann, 2003).

Lack of Infrastructure. Commonly acknowledged in small business literature is the idea

that training and development activities do not occur as frequently and are often less formal than

large businesses (Gray & Mabey, 2005; Storey, 2004). Research has shown that small businesses

have higher turnover rates than their large business counterparts and their size limits the amount

of time their employees can be taken away from productivity related tasks for training activities

(Gray & Mabey, 2005). In addition to the loss of immediate productivity, the idea that scarce

resources are being invested in employees who will soon take these skills to other employer’s

influences owner’s attitudes about engaging in training and development activities (Bryan,

2006).

Costs. Another training barrier for a small business are the costs. Small business owners

are hesitant or not willing to invest their limited resources in training programs if they cannot see

any immediate benefits (Bryan, 2006; Dewhurst, Dewhurst, & Livesey, 2007). Owners want

business investments to increase the profitability of the business, and if the training benefits are

not immediate or quantifiable, the owner may not see training as a worthwhile investment and

likely not invest in the training and development activity (Webster et al., 2005).

The costs of the training materials, instructors, and lost productivity are significant for

small business owners (Bryan, 2006; Gray & Mabey, 2005). Storey (2004) also points out how

small businesses training is proportionally higher because there are rarely price breaks given for

small purchases and each trainee would bear a higher proportional cost. An additional cost

23

before any training starts is with the small businesses having to invest in investigating different

training programs, possible locations, and transportation (Reich & Scheuermann, 2003). A final

cost in each of these tasks requires an employee or owner to focus on something that is not

producing immediate, tangible benefits for the business.

Time. Lastly, “time is money,” and each of these tasks requires an employee or owner to

focus on something that is not producing immediate benefits. The small business owner must

invest a considerable amount of time away from productive tasks to research and evaluate

different training materials, find a training location, and plan transportation (Reich &

Scheuermann, 2003). Small businesses have a finite number of employees, and when they are

taken away from their daily tasks to attend training, the business is left shorthanded.

Human Resource Development

Many small business owners today, much like their ancestors, might not fully understand

all the concepts of human resource development, but are using those concepts to keep their

businesses alive and striving.

Human resource development as an academic discipline is a young one and has struggled

to have its identity defined. The debate over whether to even define human resource

development and what that definition should be has been an ongoing source of tension by many

notable scholars in the field. To date, there is no consensus among scholars and practitioners to

either the “to define or not define” debate, much less what the definition should be.

Two of the most recognized proposed definitions are by Gilley and Eggland (1989) and

Swanson and Holton (2001). The first by Gilley and Eggland (1989) is “organized learning

activities arranged within an organization in order to improve performance and/or personal

growth for the purpose of improving the job, the individual, and/or the organization” (p. 5). The

24

second by Swanson and Holton (2001) is “HRD is a process of developing and unleashing

expertise for the purpose of improving individual, team, work process, and organizational system

performance” (p. 4). While the definitions vary some, the theme of organized learning for the

purpose of increasing personal and organization performance is present in both.

Every organization is comprised of physical, financial and human resources. The training

and development of human capital that takes place in human resource development is an

essential part of human resources. The physical resources of machines, buildings, and other

equipment are tangible and without a doubt essential to an organization. The financial resources

of money, stocks, investments, and bonds are also essential to the survival of the organization

(Gilley and Eggland, 1989).

The majority of the human resources portion of the organization is comprised of

employees. The ability to calculate their value is something that cannot be easily quantifiable

like that of money, equipment, materials or stocks, but certainly, the value of well trained,

knowledgeable and skilled employees are noticed compared to those who are underperforming.

The quantifiable cost of turnover or replacing employees can be felt through “recruiting, hiring,

relocating, lost productivity, training and orientation” (Gilley et al., 2002). The value of well-

trained employees versus replacing a non-performing one is why human resource development is

vital to any organization.

E-learning

The advancements in technology over the last 30 years have not only ushered in the

creation of the smartphone and the Internet but have made them affordable and readily available.

E-learning uses these advancements in communication technology to assist in making learning

practical for everyone, despite time or distance. E-learning is an all-encompassing term used to

25

describe an electronic-based system that delivers instructional material for the purpose of

learning. The Association for Talent Development (ATD) defines E-learning as a “wide set of

applications and processes, such as web-based learning, computer-based learning, virtual

classrooms, and digital collaboration. It includes delivery of content via the internet,

intranet/extranet, LAN/WAN (local area network/wide area network) audio-/videotape, satellite

broadcast, interactive TV, and CD-ROM” (DeRouin, Fritzsche, & Salas, 2005, p. 920). All of

these can be received on a variety of devices such as a home computer, portable laptop, iPad or

tablet, and even a smartphone.

E-learning provides businesses the ability to increase both the efficiency and

effectiveness of their training programs by reducing costs, providing faster delivery, and

allowing self-paced learning. E-learning can be used for the efficient delivery of everything from

mandatory training modules to skill building modules to help with cross training (Clarke et al.,

2005). “E-learning combines improved computer capabilities, improved telecommunications

infrastructures and improved pedagogical techniques to improve training offerings cost-

effectively” (Grollman & Cannon, 2003, p. 45).

History of E-learning

E-learning is one of the most current forms in the long history of distance learning

evolution. Distance learning can be traced back to the 1700’s when Caleb Phillips, a shorthand

teacher, advertised to teach anywhere in the country through correspondence courses by mail.

The growth of the United States Post Office in the 1800’s allowed for correspondent education to

flourish and serve women and other oppressed populations of the time (Harting & Erthal, 2005).

In 1873, inspired by the success of correspondence courses in the United States, the University

of the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa founded the first dedicated distance learning facility

26

(Ferriman, 2013). By 1892, the University of Chicago became the first U.S. college to offer

correspondence courses. Correspondence education remained a favorite vehicle for distance

education for the next 50 years.

The early twentieth century brought about the new technology of radio. In 1921, excited

by the prospect of a new medium for distance learning, the Latter-Day Saints’ University of Salt

Lake City applied for and received the first educational radio license (Moore & Kearsley, 2011).

The State University of Iowa began offering for credit courses via the radio in 1925 and by the

late 1920’s several K-12 school programs were being broadcast over the air (Moore & Kearsley,

2011).

The 1930’s saw the dawn of new and exciting technology, television. A pioneer once

again, the State University of Iowa began broadcasting its first over the air course in 1934 and by

1939 was offering almost 400 different educational programs (Unwin & McAleese, 1988).

Throughout the 1940’s, 1950’s, and 1960’s educational broadcasting continued to flourish with

the help of the contributions of the Ford Foundation, the federal Educational Television Facilities

Act of 1962, and the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 (Moore & Kearsley, 2011). The funding

from private donors and federal legislation led to over 53 stations broadcasting classes and

programs to public schools all over the country (Schweizer, 2004).

The 1970’s began with the continued increase of educational television programs, now

reaching above 230, but there were changes on the horizon (Harting & Erthal, 2005). In 1971,

the United Kingdom’s Open University utilized television, radio, recorded audio and video, and

home experiment kits to become the world’s first university to teach only distance education

courses (Perry, 1977). The late 1970’s and beginning of the 1980’s started to see the emergence

27

of computer architecture and experiments on its uses as an educational tool (Sun, Finger, & Liu,

2014).

The 1980’s heralded the infancy of E-learning with the rise of personal computers and the

beginning of the Internet (Schweizer, 2004). One of the early stages of E-learning came in the

form of computer-assisted instruction. This advance allowed the user to learn about software

application while actively engaging with the application. One of the most popular examples is

the helpful (but, some attest, annoying) “Microsoft Paperclip” in Microsoft Office (Kylli, 2005).

While computer-assisted instruction, computer software, and the Internet pushed traditional

education boundaries, they were merely traditional education material being offered in an online

format (Popovici & Mironov, 2015).

The 1990’s saw E-learning beginning to take shape with the advent of the personal

computer, digital video, broadband, and the increased popularity and availability of the Internet

throughout the world. These technologies allowed the creation of the Web-Based Training era,

which universities used as a viable educational E-learning tool (Kasraie & Kasraie, 2010).

During this period, E-learning was used to make blended learning education possible (Shim,

Dekleva, Guo, & Mittleman, 2011). The ability to transfer knowledge through web-based

communications on demand and anywhere made E-learning an attractive technology for

organizations and universities (Joo, Lim, & Park, 2011). The 1990’s concluded with one of the

most recognizable advancements in E-learning. The founding and launch of a standardized

platform, such as Blackboard, for online course management and delivery.

The 2000’s saw an explosion in the development of content and use of E-learning for

educational purposes (Popovici & Mironov, 2014). As Internet access becomes more

widespread, mobile computing options continue to grow, the number of E-learning courses

28

increases and new E-learning platforms are developed, more people are drawn to online learning

(Chawla & Joshi, 2012). The demand for online learning has resulted in a number of E-learning

universities being established, traditional universities offering E-learning courses, and corporate

universities embracing E-learning technology (Parnell & Carraher, 2003).

Types of E-learning

High-speed communication technologies, web-based applications, and standardized E-

learning platforms have all provided businesses with the educational tools they need to train their

workforces and solve organizational problems (Cheng, 2011). The different tools available are

used to support the different methods of E-learning. E-learning is most often discussed in three

different contexts including synchronous, asynchronous, and blended learning (Carruth &

Carruth, 2012).

Synchronous learning is an instructor-led instruction that occurs in a virtual classroom in

real-time. The instructor and students meet in the online virtual classroom on a specific day and

at a specific time where they can send and receive information simultaneously with each other

(Ruiz, Mintzer, & Leipzig, 2006). Some examples of synchronous learning are audio/video

Teleconferencing, virtual classrooms, online chat rooms, and instant messaging (Bachman,

2000).

Asynchronous learning is instructor-led, but it does not occur in real-time. Learners are

given the flexibility of learning anywhere and anytime they choose. This approach allows

learners to receive just-in-time training of what is needed to perform a specific task. The lack of

real-time interaction is supplemented by the more substantial use of interactive multimedia to

keep learners engaged (Bachman, 2000). Some examples of asynchronous learning are

29

interactive tutorials, self-paced online courses, web presentations, and discussion groups (Zhang

& Nunamaker, 2003).

Blended learning includes a combination of face-to-face and asynchronous learning for

instruction. This method allows instructors and students to have a live collaborative instruction

session, but also reinforces sessions with the benefits of on-demand asynchronous learning. This

mode is often viewed as the most efficient way to learn for many students because it combines

the benefits of online learning and human interaction (Clarke, Lewis, Cole, & Ringrose, 2005).

An example of blended learning is a university cohort program that uses a combination of E-

learning and face-to-face meetings.

Advantages

There are numerous advantages of E-learning for learners, instructors, and organizations

alike (Chang, 2016; Kasraie & Kasraie, 2010). The most common advantages mentioned in the

literature are the cost savings and flexibility that E-learning provides (Daymont & Blau, 2011).

E-learning allows organizations to reduce training costs by eliminating travel costs, salaries, lost

opportunities, training facilities, and a reduction in training materials (Joo, Lim, & Park, 2011;

Yusuf & Al-Banawi, 2013). E-learning allows users the flexibility to access the E-learning

materials at any time, from anywhere, and to complete the modules at a pace they feel

comfortable (Chen & Tseng, 2012; Shale, 2003).

While cost savings and flexibility garner most of the attention, there are many other

advantages of E-learning that benefit learners, instructors, and organizations. E-learning benefits

learners by incorporating the latest technologies and learning theories, increases engagement

through peer and instructor interactions, offers just-in-time training, provides more access to

instructors, adds the ability to adapt to different learning styles, and uses real-world data giving

30

the learner a more in-depth and positive learning experience (Chang, 2015; Horton, 2000). E-

learning allows instructors to eliminate or reduce travel significantly and update course content

instantly. Organizations benefit from E-learning in more ways than just through cost reductions

by being able to deliver high quality, uniform training to a global staff, and to create a valuable

learning resource (Chang, 2015; Horton, 2000). Lastly, E-learning affords access to educational

and learning opportunities for all (Cavanaugh, 1999).

Challenges

The literature has identified several challenges to using E-learning as a training method.

For instance, Graham and Jones (2011) found that employees showed interest in E-learning, but

that technical problems and financial resources are significant challenges in facilitating a

productive E-learning environment. For example, the development and management of E-

learning courses are more time-intensive of instructors and support staff than traditional training

methods, thus requiring more financial resources (Omar, Kalulu, & Alijani, 2011). In addition to

the other challenges mentioned, Bolan (2001) found that a lack of E-learning knowledge,

commitment from senior management, and quality courses were additional E-learning

challenges. Lastly, Internet access, limited bandwidth, technology fears by employees, the lack

of university quality business courses, impersonal nature, and hard to form social and personal

relationships are all challenges to E-learning success (Donlevy, 2003; Schweizer, 2004).

Appendix C highlights the challenges facing E-learning.

TAM and E-learning

Developed by Davis (1989), the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) measures factors

that are used to predict learners’ acceptance or rejection of technology. According to TAM, the

acceptance or rejection of technology is based on that individual's perceived ease of use and

31

usefulness of the technology (Davis, 1989; Sheikhshoaei & Oloumi, 2011). TAM has been used

throughout the literature to study learners’ acceptance or rejection of various learning

technologies, i.e., E-learning, in various organizational context (El-Gayar, Moran, & Hawkes,

2011; Sheikhshoaei & Oloumi, 2011). A study of 408 Korean construction professionals

conducted by Park, Son, and Kim (2012) found that the usage of E-learning was significantly

affected by the learners perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Kim and Frick (2011)

conducted a study on 800 adult learners throughout the United States using the TAM and found

that learners with a higher technology competence would begin E-learning training significantly

faster than those with a lower technology competence. Additional studies by Cheng, Tsai,

Cheng, and Chen (2012) and Shroff, Vogel, Coombes, and Lee (2007) found similar results in a

variety of different context.

These studies confirmed that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use - TAM

factors - influence learners’ behavior with regards to E-learning (Cheng, Tsai, Cheng, and Chen,

2012; El-Gayar, Moran, & Hawkes, 2011; Sheikhshoaei & Oloumi, 2011). Learning outcomes

from training can be negatively affected if users do not find the E-learning as the best way to

learn the material or if the platform is not user-friendly.

Restaurant Industry

The current study was conducted in the restaurant industry, specifically the fast food

segment, and understanding the variety of restaurants available to consumers is instructive. A

review of the existing literature found the restaurant industry could be divided into four

categories: fine dining, casual dining, fast casual, and fast food or quick service restaurants

(QSR).

32

The restaurant industry accounts for approximately 13 million people or 10% of the total

workforce, making it one of the largest employment sectors in the United States (National

Restaurant Association, 2017). In 2017, with estimated sales of $799 billion, the restaurant

industry was the largest growing sector. An estimated 1.6 million additional restaurant jobs are

expected to be created over the next ten years, with total restaurant employment predicted to

reach 16.3 million by 2027 (National Restaurant Association, 2017). The revenue and

employment generated by the restaurant industry are essential to other industries in the U.S.

economy. It is estimated that an additional 34 jobs are created for every $1 million spent in

restaurants, every restaurant supports full-time jobs in another industry, and ancillary industries

benefit as the restaurant industry grows (National Restaurant Association, 2011).

Fine Dining

Fine dining or full-service restaurants focus on the customer experience through high-

quality food, superior customer service, and an ambiance that makes for a memorable

experience. However, this memorable experience comes at a premium price. Fine dining

restaurants are characterized by destination locations that recommend or require reservations,

command a high price, tablecloths, and an attentive staff to ensure superior customer satisfaction

and experience (Arora, 2012). Examples of fine dining restaurants include Fleming's Prime

Steakhouse™, The Capital Grille™, Morton's The Steakhouse™, and the Melting Pot™.

Casual Dining

Casual dining restaurants focus less on the ambiance and more on the speed of service. At

a lower price than fine dining restaurants, casual dining restaurants are one of the most common

types of restaurants (Rivera, DiPietro, Murphy, & Muller, 2008). Casual dining restaurants are

characterized by focusing on speed of service, reservations are not required or even available

33

sometimes, no tablecloths, and a lower price than fine dining restaurants (Arora, 2012).

Examples of casual dining restaurants include Texas Roadhouse™, Cheddar's Scratch

Kitchen™, Cracker Barrel Old Country Store™, and Olive Garden™.

Fast Casual

Fast casual restaurants are a fusion of casual dining and fast food restaurants. The quality

of food is better than the typical fast food restaurant with faster service than is found in casual

dining restaurants. Fast casual restaurants use a structure that is similar to fast food but sacrifices

some speed of service for a higher quality product (Ryu & Han, 2010). This higher quality

product is reflected by a price that is higher than typical fast food establishments. Examples of

fast casual restaurants include Einstein Bros. Bagels™, Panera Bread™, Chipotle Mexican

Grill™, and Pei Wei Asian Diner™.

Quick Service Restaurant or Fast Food

Fast food or quick service restaurants (QSR) are focused on products that are quickly and

easily prepared and delivered to keep their speed of service maximized at the cost of lower

quality food compared to the other dining options (Rashid, Rani, Yusuf, & Shaari, 2015). Fast

food restaurants deliver products that are ready to be consumed quickly, easily, and optimized

for the on-the-go consumer. Fast food has the lowest price and highest volume of all the

restaurants. The fast food industry attempts to provide customers with a quick and convenient

dining option with a minimal price. Examples of fast food restaurants include McDonald’s™,

Taco Bell™, Chick-Fil-A™, Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen™, and Captain D’s™. Table 3 offers a

more comprehensive list of fast food restaurants, sales, franchises, and total units.

34

Table 3

Fast food restaurants

Company Category

2016 U.S.

Systemwide

Sales

(millions)

2016 U.S. Average

Sales Per Unit

(thousands)

Number of

Franchised

Units in 2016

Total Units

in 2016

McDonald's* Burger 36,389.00 2,550.00 13,046 14,155

Subway Sandwich 11,300.00 422.52 26,744 26,744

Wendy's Burger 9,930.20 1,570.00 6,207 6,537

Burger King* Burger 9,749.19 1,361.43 7,111 7,161

Taco Bell Ethnic 9,353.80 1,510.00 5,399 6,278

Chick-fil-A Chicken 7,973.50 4,407.10 1,730 2,102

Sonic* Burger 4,504.14 1,284.00 3,201 3,557

KFC Chicken 4,483.30 1,060.00 3,966 4,167

Carl'sJr./Hardee's Burger 3,761.00 1,249.00 2,774 3,011

Dairy Queen Snack 3,621.00 1,268.05 4,515 4,517

Arby's Sandwich 3,600.00 1,117.00 2,314 3,358

Jack in the Box Burger 3,445.00 1,530.00 1,838 2,255

Popeyes Chicken 3,140.30 1,488.00 2,029 2,084

Whataburger Burger 2,181.35 2,706.00 122 806

Zaxby's* Chicken 1,891.98 2,318.60 677 816

Checkers/Rally's Burger 837.36 1,114.89 541 841

Captain D's Seafood 544.43 1,059.00 227 516

*Includes figures estimated by QSR.

Note. Adapted from The QSR 50, by QSR Magazine, retrieved from

https://www.qsrmagazine.com/content/qsr50-2017-top-50-

chart?sort=2016_us_systemwide_sales_millions&dir=desc Copyright 2018 by Journalistic, Inc.

https://www.qsrmagazine.com/content/qsr50-2017-top-50-chart?sort=2016_us_systemwide_sales_millions&dir=desc

https://www.qsrmagazine.com/content/qsr50-2017-top-50-chart?sort=2016_us_systemwide_sales_millions&dir=desc

35

Summary

This review has provided an overview of pertinent literature and information gathered

from previous studies that relate to small business, E-learning, and human resource development.

The literature review found that there was no single definition of a small business or even a small

and medium enterprise. The definition used would differ depending on the country where the

research was being conducted, the researcher, or factors that were never given. For

comparability, this study used the definition from the United States Small Business

Administration (SBA). The Office of Advocacy defines a small business as “an independent

business having fewer than 500 employees” with caps on their revenue based on their relevant

classification code in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)” (The U.S.

Small Business Administration, 2016, p. 1).

In reviewing the literature, numerous studies examined the positive effects of a well-

trained workforce on the success of large, medium, and small businesses (Blundell, Dearden,

Meghir, & Sianesi, 1999; de Kok, Deijl, & Veldhuis-Van Essen, 2013; Reich & Scheuermann,

2003). Other studies showed how E-learning was able to break through some of the training

barriers for small businesses and some of the challenges that they must still overcome (Chang,

2015; Horton, 2000). However, there were a limited number of studies specifically focused on

the small business manager’s capabilities relevant to E-learning. At the time of this study, none

looked at small business manager perceptions of E-learning in the United States.

The purpose of this study is to examine perceptions of E-learning by management

trainees in a small, fast food restaurant. A qualitative study was used to provide an in-depth

understanding of the small, fast food business managers’ perceptions of E-learning. The next

chapter will outline the methods used in the study.

36

Chapter Three

Method

Chapter three describes the methodology and procedures used in this study. This chapter

describes the research design, research participants, data collection, data analysis, reliability,

limitations, and ethical issues in the study. Additionally, the researcher’s role and influence in

the study will be addressed.

The purpose of this research study is to investigate the perceptions of E-learning by

management trainees in a small, fast food restaurant. The research questions of the study are best

answered by an interpretive case study using qualitative research methods. The limited amount

of information found during the literature review involving management trainees’ perceptions of

E-learning warrants a qualitative study to conduct an initial exploration of the phenomena.

Participant observation, documents, and face-to-face interviews were used as data collection

methods to develop a deeper understanding of small business manager perceptions. Member

checks, peer reviews, and triangulation were all methods that were drawn upon to confirm the

trustworthiness of the data collected. The goals of this initial exploratory study are to develop a

deeper understanding of the trainees’ perceptions, possibly generating suggestions for future

research.

Research Paradigm

The interpretive paradigm was deemed the most appropriate for this qualitative research

study. The goal of interpretivism is attempting “to understand the social world as it is (the status

quo) from the perspective of individual experience” (Rossman & Rallis, 2003, p. 46). Another

goal of interpretivism is a “thick description,” which is agreement with one of the aims of the

37

research study (Rossman & Rallis, 2003). Table 4 shows the characteristics of the interpretive

paradigm used in this study.

Table 4

Characteristics of the Interpretive Paradigm

Characteristic Description

Purpose of research Develop an understanding and interpret management trainees’

perceptions of E-learning that could affect successful learning

transfer.

Epistemology • Knowledge is gained through a strategy that “respects the

differences between people and the objects of natural sciences and

therefore requires the social scientist to grasp the subjective meaning

of social action” (Grix, 2004, p. 64).

• Knowledge is gained inductively to create a theory.

• Knowledge arises from particular situations and is not reducible to

simplistic interpretation.

• Knowledge is gained through personal experience

Ontology • Reality is indirectly constructed based on individual interpretation

and is subjective

• People interpret and make their own meaning of events.

• Events are distinctive and cannot be generalized.

• There are multiple perspectives on one incident.

• Causation in social sciences is determined by interpreted meaning

and symbols.

Note. Adapted from “The philosophical underpinnings of educational research”, by L. Mack,

2010, p. 8.

Rationale for a Qualitative Study

A qualitative research study is considered by many scholars to be the best methodology

for studying human learning (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003; Domegan & Fleming, 2007). The focus

of this study is on management trainees’ perceptions of E-learning in a small business

38

environment and not on the outcomes of the E-learning training. A qualitative research study is

well-suited for exploring the complex human behaviors found in learning and understanding

perceptions of participants. Additionally, there was a limited amount of information found during

the literature review involving management trainees’ perceptions of E-learning.

Rationale for a Case Study

A case study is a form of social science research that allows thick description and

analysis of a phenomenon, system, or social unit constrained by time or place. It contains a

comprehensive description of the setting and the participants, followed by an analysis of the data

to uncover patterns and themes (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2008). Robert Yin (2003) stated that “case

studies are the preferred strategy when the ‘how’ or ‘why’ questions are being posed,” (p. 1) and

the behavior of those in the study cannot be manipulated as in this proposed study. Hartley

(2004) defines a case study as

a heterogeneous activity covering a range of research methods and techniques, a range of

coverage (from single case study through carefully matched pairs up to multiple cases),

varied levels of analysis (individuals, groups, organizations, organizational fields or

social policies), and differing lengths and levels of involvement in organizational

functioning. (p. 332)

Case study research employs the use of observation, document analysis, interviews, and

recording and transcribing; these are referred to as the four major methods of qualitative research

(Silverman, 2001). This study is best suited for a case study approach because it asks the “how”

and “why,” has clear boundaries, and it seeks to describe the whole of the case and the

relationships within it (holistic). Hence, a case study allows for investigation of management

trainees’ stories, feelings, and perceptions of their E-learning experience at a small, fast food

restaurant.

39

Participants

A purposeful sampling strategy was employed to select the participants for the study. Yin

(2015) defines purposeful sampling as “the selection of participants or sources of data to be used

in a study, based on their anticipated richness and relevance of information in relation to the

study’s research questions” (p. 339). Purposeful sampling is the most commonly used sampling

strategy in qualitative research because of its focus on seeking in-depth and rich information that

may lead itself to further study. The study was conducted at a local fast food franchise in

Memphis, Tennessee. The local fast food franchisee employs under 499 employees and has

annual revenue of less than $11,000,000, making it a small business under SBA guidelines. The

interviewees were management trainees in weeks six through eight of an eight-week long

management training program. The participant pool was established by soliciting volunteers

from an insert in their first paycheck. All new employees receive a paper check for their first pay

period, so the invitation reached all new trainees. Participants were chosen from the participant

pool and interviewed off-site at the franchise warehouse conference room.

Ethical Concerns

A protocol form, provided in the Appendix, and informed consent form, also provided in

the Appendix, were submitted to the University of Arkansas’ Institutional Review Board for

approval before the beginning of data collection to ensure the protection of all study participants.

Participants were asked to select pseudonyms to ensure confidentiality in the reporting process of

this research. No anticipated risks exist for participants of this study. Study participants were free

to withdraw from research participation at any time during the study. The recordings and

transcriptions of the interviews will remain confidential, and any field notes, recordings, and

transcriptions will be destroyed when the dissertation is complete.

40

Data Collection

The researcher conducted in-person interviews with a sample of ten management

trainees. The face-to-face interviews took place in the franchise warehouse conference room.

Each interview lasted approximately 45 minutes to an hour and used a semi-structured interview

protocol based on a list of questions developed to help answer the research questions. A digital

audio recorder was used to record the data, and written notes were taken as a backup. When

necessary, a follow-up phone call with participants was needed to clarify responses. The

interviews were conducted using Berg’s “10 Commandments of Interviewing” as a framework:

1. Never begin an interview cold.

2. Remember your purpose.

3. Present a natural front.

4. Demonstrate aware hearing.

5. Think about appearance.

6. Interview in a comfortable place.

7. Don’t be satisfied with monosyllabic answers.

8. Be respectful.

9. Practice, practice, and practice some more.

10. Be cordial and appreciative. (Berg, 2004, p. 110-111)

Role of the Researcher

The researcher is the primary data collection instrument in qualitative research studies.

Since the researcher was conducting all the interviews and document analysis, the disclosure of

biases, anticipations, and assumptions are critical for issues of trustworthiness (Denzin &

Lincoln, 2003). A researcher should have empathic neutrality and a desire to “understand the

41

world as it unfolds” and then present the rules in an objective way (Patton, 2002, p. 51).

“Because qualitative researchers believe that your personal views can never be kept separate

from interpretations, personal reflections about the meaning of the data are included in the

research study. You base these personal interpretations on hunches, insights, and intuition”

(Creswell, 2008, p. 264). The management trainees did not know about the researcher’s

involvement with the implementation of the E-learning modules. The first-hand knowledge of

the E-learning modules allowed the researcher to have some unique insights. The challenge of

remaining impartial and keeping bias in-check during the study required remaining cognizant of

any bias during the entire research process. The researcher, remaining aware of this issue, led to

the careful development of open-ended questions that allowed opportunities for ideas to be

challenged. Last, the researcher’s familiarity with the E-learning software required the researcher

to use very little to no jargon or acronyms that are specific to the proprietary E-learning modules.

Trustworthiness

The traditional criteria of reliability and validity that are used to ensure rigorous and

credible research data are easy to apply in quantitative research studies because they use

standardized instruments that are readily assessed. However, qualitative research studies use the

researcher as the primary instrument of data collection and often rely on smaller, purposeful

sampling. Therefore, the reliability and validity criteria traditionally used in quantitative research

cannot be easily applied to qualitative research where the goal is developing a deeper

understanding and meaning of phenomena.

The difficulty in applying traditional methods of validity, reliability and objectivity

criteria to qualitative research does not mean that rigor does not exist nor should there be a one-

size-fits-all approach to validity and reliability. Trustworthiness is a term being used more

42

frequently in the literature to safeguard the quality of research. Harrison, MacGibbon, and

Morton (2001) define trustworthiness as: “the ways we work to meet the criteria of validity,

credibility, and believability of our research – as assessed by the academy, our communities, and

our participants” (p. 324). Guba and Lincoln (1981), Creswell (1998), Shenton (2004), and many

other scholars identify four strategies to establish trustworthiness that have similar external and

internal validity, reliability, and objectivity as their quantitative parallel: credibility,

transferability, dependability, and conformability.

Credibility

Credibility is the qualitative equivalent of internal validity found in quantitative research.

Credibility is a paradigm for making sure the data and data analysis are believable and a matchup

with reality. However, the very nature of qualitative research states that different people have

different perceptions of reality. The interpretive perspective proposes that understanding is co-

created and thus the inclusion of member checking is an important method to increase

credibility. Lincoln and Guba (1985) believe the inclusion of “member checking into the findings

as the most critical technique for establishing credibility” (p. 314). The researcher will perform

member checks by making sure that participants are given copies of the interview transcripts and

then given an opportunity to clarify or elaborate on any of their responses.

Patton (2002) proposed that credible qualitative research should contain three elements:

“rigorous methods, the credibility of the researcher, and the philosophical belief in the value of

qualitative inquiry” (p. 552). The researched fulfilled the requirements of the three elements by

adhering to the process of grounded theory, acknowledging his own experiences as a human

resource professional, and his belief in the merits of qualitative research in the pursuit of

answering the research questions in the study.

43

Transferability

Transferability is the qualitative equivalent of external validity found in quantitative

research. Transferability is the extent to which the findings of the study can be applied or

generalized to a different population or setting than that of the study. Transferability is a

significant obstacle for qualitative researchers and especially studies like this one with small

samples sizes and a single case study. In these cases, the researcher can boost transferability by

“providing a detailed, rich description of the setting studied, so that readers are given sufficient

information to be able to judge the applicability of the findings to other settings which they

know” (Seale, 1999), p. 45). The researcher will provide information about the geographic

location, descriptive information about the setting, and data collection procedures to fulfill these

requirements.

Dependability

Dependability is the qualitative equivalent of reliability found in quantitative research.

Dependability is the ability to consistently achieve the same study results in a similar context.

The issue with dependability is that humans are complex and the numerous factors that influence

their behaviors, actions, and ultimately their answers are boundless. Dependability is further

complicated by multiple interpretations of the same data by different researchers, readers, and

even the participants themselves. Again, the researcher can help achieve dependability by

documenting in detail the data collection methods, decisions made during the data collection and

analysis stages, and the methods used during the study.

Confirmability

Confirmability is the final criteria for establishing trustworthiness in qualitative research.

It is the qualitative equivalent of objectivity found in quantitative research. Confirmability is

44

ensuring the findings of the study are the results of the data collected and not researcher bias.

Triangulation is one of several methods that help mitigate researcher bias in qualitative studies.

Triangulation is the use of multiple data sources, i.e., information gathering during the

interviews, training documents, and observation of the training. As reoccurring themes emerge

from the different data sources, this approach offers an opportunity to cross-validate the data

being collected. Again, member checking was used to ensure the trustworthiness of data.

Data Analysis

An interpretive researcher gathers the bulk of his or her data through direct interaction

with the phenomena studied. In a qualitative case study, the search for understanding and

meaning of the phenomena through direct interpretation of first-hand observations and the

feelings and perceptions of the participants is an integral part of the data analysis process.

Merriam and Tisdell (2015) define qualitative data analysis as “the process of making

sense out of the data. Moreover, making sense out of data involves consolidating, reducing, and

interpreting what people have said and what the researcher has seen and read – it is the process

of making meaning” (p. 202). Shown in Figure 1, Schutt (2011) outlined a flow chart of

characteristics shared by most of the qualitative data analysis approaches.

45

Figure 1. Flow Model of Qualitative Data Analysis Components. Reprinted from Investigating

the social world: The process and practice of research, by Schutt, R. K. (2011), Pine Forge

Press.

Unlike many of the formulas of quantitative data analysis, there are no such formulas for

qualitative research. The data rarely proceeds in a linear fashion, and as shown in the flow

model, the data analysis begins during the data collection process. During the data collection

process, the researcher takes notes and works to identify issues and concepts that may be useful

later in examining the phenomena. After the interviews are transcribed, and member checks are

conducted, notes taken during data collection and transcription will be categorized and organized

to search for patterns, themes, and the emergence of meaning from the data. The goal of coding

and organizing the data is to create categories that provide a preliminary framework for making

deductions and drawing conclusions about the phenomena being studied.

Coding

With the goal of developing a theory or model, this study followed the two cycles of

coding put forth by Saldaña (2013). The first cycle of coding, initial or open coding, was used to

46

break the transcripts down line-by-line into smaller sections that could be examined and

compared, allowing themes to be revealed (Saldaña, 2013). The initial coding of interview and

document data aided in identifying and theorizing about processes that guided the researcher on

codes to further explore. Also, it assisted the researcher in becoming more familiar with the

“participant language, perspectives, and worldviews” (Saldaña, 2013, p. 64).

The second cycle of coding, focused coding, was used to identify themes that were

thought-provoking to the study, organize the similar codes into groups or clusters, and construct

codes for the newly created groups or clusters. Focused coding allowed the most noteworthy

concepts that emerged in the data from multiple participants to be compared to the codes initially

found in the initial coding (Saldaña, 2013).

All of the interview transcripts, field notes, and any additional documents collected

during the interviews were coded using the same two-cycle process. The two cycles of coding

produced categories and subcategories that could be merged, allowing for a comparative analysis

to be conducted (Saldaña, 2013).

Assumptions

This study has several assumptions associated with it:

1. The qualitative research model was the most appropriate to explore management trainees’

E-learning perceptions.

2. The management trainees provided honest and forthright information during the

interviews.

3. The E-learning modules accurately prepared managers for their duties.

4. This was the management trainees first time participating in the E-learning modules.

47

5. The management trainees would be available and willing to participate in the interview

process.

Limitations

The following limitations were present for this study:

1. The sample size was limited by the company due to the time commitment needed to

interview each participant.

2. Self-reported data is less precise than other forms of data collection.

3. The study participants were from one geographic region only.

4. The study only represents one specific industry, restaurants.

5. The transfer of learning from the training was only measured by the manager's

perceptions and not any consistent behaviors, testing, or feedback from peers or

supervisors.

Delimitations

The delimitations of a study are the factors that might prohibit a study from being

replicated in the future (Bryant, 2004). The delimiting factors of this current study are:

1. A focus on the specific sample population that was studied.

2. Proprietary E-learning modules that were used.

3. The findings of the management trainee interviews from the small, fast food restaurant

may not apply to other small businesses, but may be interesting and suggest further

studies.

Declaration of Potential Bias

The researcher of the current study has been working in the fast food industry for the past

nine years. While this experience provides the researcher many insights into the industry

48

outsiders would not have, it also creates a potential for bias and preconceived notions. Lastly, it

is important to disclose that the researcher is a current employee of the subject fast food

restaurant.

49

Chapter Four

Findings

Chapter four describes the finding of this research study. This chapter includes the

demographic information of the participants, a summary of the findings, emerged themes

discovered during the detailed analysis, and a chapter summary.

The purpose of this qualitative research study was to investigate management trainees’

perceptions of their E-learning experience at a small, fast food restaurant. The participants

included ten management trainees in weeks six through eight of an eight-week long management

training program. They were interviewed using face-to-face, semi-structured, open-ended

questions to get the most detail out of each participant. Two research questions were used to

guide the research study to explore management trainees’ perceptions of E-learning and their

preferred methods of training.

Q1. What are the perceptions of E-learning by management trainees in a small, fast food

restaurant?

Q2. How does the preferred method of training affect perceptions of E-learning?

Description of the Sample

Ten independent interviews were conducted with ten management trainees to gain a

deeper understanding of their stories, feelings, and perceptions of their E-learning experience at a

small, fast food restaurant. All ten participants answered every question. Interviews with

participants occurred over a seven-week period. Of the ten participants interviewed, seven were

female, and three were male. Five ranged in age from 20 - 29, three between 30 - 39, and the

final two between 40 - 49. Eight participants identified as Black or African American and two

identified as White or Caucasian. One participant had an Associates degree, four a high school

50

diploma, one a postsecondary nondegree award, and four some college, but no degree. See Table

5 for details.

Table 5

Participant Demographics

Participant Gender Age Range Race Education

P1 Male 20 - 29 Black or African

American

High school diploma or

equivalent

P2 Female 30 - 39 Black or African

American


equivalent

P3 Female 30 - 39 White or Caucasian Some college, no degree


American


equivalent


American


equivalent


American

Some college, no degree


American



American



American

Postsecondary nondegree

award

P10 Female 40 - 49 White or Caucasian Associates Degree

51

Summary of the Findings

The interviews consisted of ten data-generating questions:

1.) Do you have any prior experience with online training?

a. What did you like and dislike?

2.) What is your preferred method of learning? Such as E-learning classes, on-site instructor-

led training, or hands-on learning?

a. Why did you find it to be the most beneficial?

3.) Did you participate in the online training on D’s Net?

4.) How comfortable were you participating in this online training?

a. What did you like and dislike?

b. Did you feel adequately prepared to navigate the online modules?

c. Are support systems available if you have questions or something is not working

correctly?

5.) How convenient was it for you for you to participate?

6.) Why do you think your company uses online training?

7.) What types of technology do you personally use on a daily basis?

8.) How do you feel about the content of your online training?

a. Did you find it relevant to your job?

b. How soon after the completion of a module would you practice it?

9.) What is your overall assessment of online training as a tool to help you do your job

better?

10.) What recommendations would you make to improve the future success of online

training?

52

Data saturation was achieved with ten respondents. All ten participants were given a copy

of their transcripts and asked to review them for accuracy. Eight of the participants had no

changes, one clarified something he or she said, and the last one filled in some blanks of

inaudible spaces during our conversation.

Several themes emerged during the interview, and coding processes including: prior

experience influence on E-learning perception, hands-on is preferred method of learning, learner

preparation and support was inconsistent, why is E-learning used, assessment of the E-learning

training, and engagement improvements needed.

Detailed Analysis

The audio collected from the interviews was transcribed and confirmed by listening to the

audio while reading the transcribed text. Any discrepancies between the audio and transcription

were fixed during this process. Member checking was then performed by allowing the

participants to review their transcripts for accuracy and clarify anything they felt did not

accurately describe their perceptions. The transcriptions were then analyzed many times by the

researcher to identify themes. The data was first coded using initial or open coding allowing

themes to be revealed. The second cycle of coding, focused coding, was used to identify themes

that were significant to the study, organize the similar codes into groups or clusters, and

construct codes for the newly created groups or clusters.

Theme 1: Design and Content Influence on E-learning Perception

Participants’ previous experience with E-learning did not have an important, if any,

influence on their opinions of the Captain D’s online training. However, the design and content

of the online training was a significant factor that influenced their opinion of both experiences.

53

Participant 1 had E-learning experience at both Arby's and Burger King. They found the

content to be informative and relevant giving them a positive experience of online learning.

The online, it didn't do nothing but help me understand better, because when you do

something so long, I mean you'll know how to do it just by going straight to it, but

knowledge wise, you'd be like, if someone was to ask you, "How long for this?" And

you'll be like, "Uh, well only thing I know is from doing it from this way, this point of

view," but it kind of help you sharpen up everything the correct way cause a lot of times,

being in a restaurant, we do know the correct way but a lot of times we like to take the

easy way, take a shortcut this way, but if somebody comes in new we just can't right off

the bat be like, "Okay, you can take the shortcut this way."

They found the content and design of the Captain D’s E-learning system beneficial to

their job giving them a favorable opinion of the online learning.

I can't dislike the online training cause it does help. Cause even if we lost on something

or got a question about something, and it's still GMs I know probably go to D's net, and

you know type up whatever such and such, you know how long can such and such sit out,

and like I said, it's a big help.

Participant 4 had previous E-learning experience with McDonald's. They found the

modules were full of extraneous information that made them longer than needed. In a fast-paced

industry, this was especially frustrating and left them with a negative opinion of E-learning.

I really don't like online training because it takes so much ... being as a manager... You

know we're a fast food company so, I can't ... I feel like I am not really helping of I'm

going to be online training. So, they have ones on fries, and it'll be 15 minutes long just to

tell you that fries cook for three minutes and 30 seconds, and they're good for seven

minutes. I'm more of a hands-on type person too. I like to physical, and I don't want to sit

there and look at it. I want to be able to get up, somebody walk with me and, you know, I

am doing it, and they critique me right then and there.

However, when asked about the online training they had recently completed with Captain

D’s they responded:

But this training, I liked it because it went in-depth, it actually showed me in time, it was

nice and short too 'cause most videos from previous place I worked was very long, like

very long, 30 minutes long. These videos are nice and short, and right afterward you can

go and practice on it, and it was just really nice. I'm more of a hands-on type of person.

54

Participant 6 had previous negative experiences with online learning at Burger King,

Taco Bell, and McDonald's. He or she did not identify the content or design as the reason for the

negative feelings, but stated, “I don't care too much about watching a video. I'd rather you show

me, and tell me, then that's it.” The Captain D’s training modules were met with a little less

pessimism as they found the content and design appealing. They stated, “It's organized. It's real

organized. Step by step what needs to be done, so, it's a good flow.” and they appreciated the

value of it being “a refresher and a follow-up.”

Participant 8 had previous experience at a school system. Their negative opinion of the E-

learning training primarily stemmed from the lack of interaction with a trainer, but the content

was also a factor. They stated:

I didn't like it, basically, because I couldn't interact. I could pause it, maybe try to find an

answer, but I'd rather much be able to ask questions when they come up, and then that

way I can get it in focus and get it into my head, that's what I'm doing. And then I don't

think they give you enough information to do what needed to be done.

Captain D’s online training also suffers from a lack of interaction, but the improved

content left them with a more positive experience.

No, it was relevant to what we do. Because when it came down to doing some cleaning

procedures on the broiler, you have to know- just like filtering them fryers. It did help

me, some. It really did. Some of it was boring. But I think overall it did help me. It helped

me a lot to accomplish what I needed to know.

Theme 2: Hands-on is the Preferred Method of Learning

All ten participants identified hands-on learning as their preferred method of learning.

Many participants preferred hands-on learning with the added benefit of an instructor or trainer

to help answer any questions that might arise during their training.

Participant 3 preferred hands-on learning but pointed out the added value of having an

instructor or trainer working alongside them.

55

I don't like reading. I'm more of a hands-on type person too. It's how I learn the best. I

like to be physical, and I don't want to sit there and look at it. I want to be able to get up,

somebody walk with me and, you know, I'm doing it, and they critique me right then and

there.

Participant 5 had a similar sentiment about the benefits of hands-on learning with an

instructor or trainer.

Because when you hands-on, you can be working with the person, teaching him right

beside him and let him know, or she, that this is right or wrong, or this is the right way,

because online things or being told is kind of hard if you've never had the experience. On

hands, it's basically more, more hands-on you just know what to do instead of just

trying to figure it out yourself.

Participant 8 found the immediate availability of answers from an instructor or trainer an

important benefit.

I'd rather have hands-on and have an instructor there, so when I'm learning, if there's

something that I don't understand as to why we need to do it, then I can stop right then

and say "Hey, why do we have to do it like this?" Or "What does this mean?" And that's a

better way that I can understand what I'm doing and why I'm doing it. Versus this is what

you do, and dah dah dah, and that's it.

Participant 9 did not specify the need for an instructor or trainer, but offered some insight

on why hands-on learning is more beneficial for them.

Seems like my brain remembers more like that. Because, you know, it's one thing to see it

in writing but to actually have it in action is something totally different. And you know,

and I think having it in action actually lets you put together what you just read. You

know, hey, let me put these steps in order. Then this is how let’s say filter. I just saw the

video, but let me actually do it. Now it would make more sense.

Participant 10 had a similar view about the connection between action and memorization.

They stated that “Because when I'm actually doing it, you know, doing the motions it helps me to

memorize better and learn better.”

Theme 3: Learner Preparation and Support was Inconsistent

There were many inconsistencies in the way participants were prepped for the online

training and the support systems available in the event of a problem.

56

Participant 1 was given an outline of what courses would be taken and verified the

system was working before leaving. They explain the process as, “What she did was she wrote

them down. She let me know what the videos were going to be. Then once we clicked on … she

stayed for the like the first 30 seconds of them.”

Participant 2 had a much different experience in which they were told “go find the videos

and watch them, and sit in here” and to continue this during non-peak hours until all the modules

were complete. They were not specifically told what to do in the event of a problem, but the

assumption was to tell the training manager.

Participant 4 felt they were only “kind of prepared,” but could not really pinpoint what

they felt was missing. They explained:

they only kind of prepared me for the video, it was like, "Well, tomorrow you're gonna be

watching a video, and it's going to go over this, and we'll go over it with you." And yeah .

So when they come, she would come sit with me, "this is the video, these are the modules

you're going to be looking at, and this is how long, this is what it's going to be explaining

about" and during the video, she would go do her manager stuff and she would come

back and check on me throughout the video.

They also commented on the support system available. They stated that “I felt like I was

bothering her when was helping other people. So, if I had any questions, I would usually wait, or

she'd say, "Just wait, get done with the video. If you have any questions, the video can answer

it."

Participant 5 was given minimal preparation and had a basic answer of whom to speak

with if there was an issue. “Most of the time they were there watching me, letting me know,

making sure I paid attention, writing notes down, and just keep eyes on me. I would talk to the

manager, the store manager if anything goes down.”

57

Participant 8 was also given an outline of what modules would be completed that day but

had a much different experience with the support system, commenting,

Oh, no, our mentor was Karen. She would always say, if you don't understand something,

just come to me. She would always be available; whether she was busy or not, she always

took the time out to tell me what I need to know, or tell me go find it, and tell you how to

find it, and show me that. So that way I knew what to do. And I kind of knew what I was

looking for, but she always was there to help. To me, especially.

Theme 4: Why is E-learning Used

One of the questioned posed to the participants was “Why do you think your company

uses online training?” None of the ten participants had been told by the company the rationale for

using online training, why it was beneficial to them, or even why it was advantageous to the

company. They were perplexed by the question and then offered an assortment of answers that

generally revolved around paper conservation or appealing to different learning styles.

Participant 1 felt:

it's doing a favor by taking the paper away. Like a three-minute video probably have

better than going through a stack of paper that you got to study for, or you got to, you

know, even though we still have a book, our books, and stuff on what we still have to go

through what position we training on, but it helps out some. It helps take the pressure off

the trainer.

Participant 3 echoed the paper conservation theory of Participant 1. “No. Cause why can't

it just be on paper? Just to save paper? I don't know. I really don't know.”

Participant 4 believes that “some people are visual learners, some type of people are

hands-on, so that's why I think.”

Participant 5 stated that “like, for me, if I never worked before, if I was just coming in, I

think it's the best way to help someone who has never worked here before to get an example of

how to do things right.”

58

Participant 6 agreed with Participant 4 on how different learning styles are appealing to

different types of people. They stated:

Good question. That's a good one. I mean you got people who like rather hear it, see it,

versus being hands-on. You got two different type of people. You got some people who

like be hands-on, you got some people who need to see it and watch it, and then they'll

know. So, I'm one of them hands-on.

Participant 7 blended the theme of paper conservation and learning styles and theorized

that some people just prefer online learning and that printed materials might not be available

when needed, while online learning modules provide access whenever needed.

I feel like they were using them because certain people are probably good at doing online

stuff. But my reason I feel like we use it is to help us. Because what if we. Say some

store might not have any of the paperwork around us. Or in here we're blessed that we

have all of our little paper works or notes, and stuff all around if we need some help, you

can look at it. But that's why we go to the D's Net. It's just a lot. So, it's like a reference

library.

Participant 8 hypothesized that online learning allows the trainer to multitask. “So, we

can do less and not take away from the business. I think we do it because we still run the

business, so she may have to do something for business, so we'll be able to sit down in front of

the computer. That's why I think we do that.”

Participant 9 echoed previous views on accommodating different learning styles being

the primary reason and technology being essential in the workplace. They commented:

Computers are, it's center to the world. So, you need to know how to navigate through all

that. But then too, some people are visual learners, and some people are hands-on

learners so, you're getting the best of both worlds. You're still getting the hands-on

learning plus the visual so someone who might not be pick it up as quick as hands-on

skilled can have the visual aspect of it so take notes before we go in there. So, I think

that's why it's there, to help with both sides.

Participant 10 believed that “because one, it's convenient, two, you can reach more

people that way, you don't have to set up a big classroom for it. To me, it just reaches the masses

easier.”

59

Theme 5: Assessment of the E-learning Training

The overall assessment of the E-learning training by all ten participants was the courses

were relevant to their job functions and beneficial to their training, despite being hands-on

learners. However, there were many areas of opportunity to improve E-learning engagement and

motivation discussed.

Participant 1 found the ability to see the overview of an entire process and the ability to

revisit training materials beneficial. They commented that “once you watch those videos, you'll

have an idea even though you be brand new, but you'll still have an idea on how everything's

supposed to go. Even if we lost on something or got a question about something, go to D's net,

and you know type up whatever such and such, and like I said, it's a big help.”

Participant 4 commented that “I liked it because it went in-depth, it actually showed me

in time, it was nice and short too 'cause most videos from previous place I worked was very long

like very long, 30 minutes long. These videos are nice and short, and right afterwards you can go

and practice on it, and it was just really nice.”

Participant 5 stated that “everything relevant” to their job and that “it's good if you've

never worked here before, it helped me know more and more about what to do.” They expanded

on the relevance of the content, “because the video had a specific thing they wanted to talk about

like cashier or kitchen … each one had a specific task ... you know which one you needed to

know.”

Participant 6 was “not big on online,” but found it a valuable resource “for a refresher” or

a reference library that could easily be accessed by “getting the laptop or the tablet and it's right

there instead of having to ask for help.” They also found the content to be “organized. It's real

organized. Step by step what needs to be done, so, it's a good flow.”

60

Participant 7 said about the E-learning system that “overall it is okay, but just me

personally, I'm just more of a hands-on person.” They found value in that it was “short, it was

simplistic, and it was straight to the point, and then when I'm able to get on the line, "Oh already

know, I got this." They had just the right amount of information, to me.” They also appreciated

that “it's not long, boring videos, and modules, and stuff. It actually five, six, seven minutes.

They had just the right amount of information, to me.”

Participant 8 found the online training “boring,” but beneficial to their overall training.

They stated:

Yeah, it did help me, some. It really did. Some of it was boring. But I think overall it did

help me. It helped me a lot to accomplish what I needed to know. But I just didn't like,

and for me to learn, those are some of the things I have to ask questions. But, you know,

you can pause it. Then you can go find a trainer. It was like, can you tell me what this

means, or whatever. It was relevant to what we do.

Participant 9 liked many of the modules, but felt “they could have been a little more

detailed, like how our training book was.” They found some the videos lacked the detailed

content found in the training manual and adding a “quiz after the video, let us see what we've

learned” would be helpful.

Theme 6: Engagement Improvements Needed

The final question of the interviews, “What recommendations would you make to

improve the future success of online training,” revealed a common theme of ways to improve

engagement among the participants. The majority of the suggestions revolved around the need to

make the modules “less boring,” more interactive, and enhancing the content. These suggestions

included the benefits of adding a quiz or questions at the end of the modules, incorporating more

real-world scenarios, gamification, and more access.

61

Participant 1 suggested a “five question assessment” at the end of each module to ensure

that participants are retaining the information and improve the accountability of the trainee. They

suggested a system similar to other fast food restaurants where “after watching the video and if

you fail the test, then go back and watch the video again, then you have to take the test over. Just

go back and retake the test until you pass.” This system also puts some accountability on the

learner to make sure they “are paying attention and not playin’ on the phone” during the online

modules. They describe a scenario of how not paying attention and continually failing the

learning checks at the end of the module can increase accountability.

Like I said, you ought to pay attention because if you don't, if you're sitting back there,

they'll come back there wonder about you, the training manager. It's going to make her

wonder about you; it will make her want to be like ... make her or him be like, okay ...

you been back there for a long time ... but he don't know not a clue, not an idea about

anything ... he or she ... they don't know nothing.

Participant 2 suggested the addition of PowerPoint slides to accompany the online

content and “maybe some type of answer games on some of them to get your mind thinking. I

feel like those would be good ideas if we had that.”

Participant 3 commented that there was some repetitiveness in some of the videos and

that “the same ones are listed under a different name twice” in different sections. They also

suggested the addition of questions at the end of each module, and adding that when an answer is

“wrong, it explains at the bottom what, why it was wrong.”

Participant 4 recommended that the modules be available to participants outside the

company network. They stated, “Cause some people want to grow faster in the company, so they

probably want to take it home when they got nothing else to do and study and look over it and

come back the next day bigger and better.”

62

Participant 5 suggested the addition of “real-life scenarios, more scenarios like, if I'm

new ... I'm a cashier, and a customer complains about anything ... I think more like them ... more

problems.”

Participant 6 was “not big on online,” but found the modules useful as a resource library.

They had no suggestions for improvements as, “It is perfect, I promise. I love it fine.”

Participant 7 suggested improving engagement through gamification and adding a

PowerPoint outline. They stated, “Like some people use the props or they use the slideshows. I

remember we used to do a lot of power-point, I feel like that helps, like slideshows having

maybe a little test games on some of them to get your mind juggling. Maybe a little games in

some of them. You know to keep people ... I don't know how to keep them focused on it more?”

Participant 8 found that some of the modules were similar to narrated PowerPoint slides

and actually demonstrating the things being described would be beneficial. They said:

Instead of just having still pictures, sometimes, I know you can have it like people just

actually doing it. You can see a live person doing this instead of having a still picture.

That makes it kind of boring sometimes. But if I could see a person disassembling the

broiler, and he's saying what the part is and all of that, instead of just showing a picture of

the broiler, or a picture of that kind of stuff. I think if you had sort of like live stuff, it'd

be much better than just the still pictures. Because you just look in there and she just

talking, and you just looking at it.

Participant 9 felt there was room for improvement in the content and the addition of

questions at the end of each module. They said, “to me; they could have been a little more

detailed like how our training book was. I think that could have been just a little more detailed

and quiz us after the video, let us see what we've learned.”

Participant 10 felt “there should've been videos of someone performing the actions” and

thought the addition of a quiz at the end of each would be beneficial. They commented, “I think

there should be test questions at the end of each module to make sure that people are really

63

paying attention to the videos since they were kind of boring. She was very monotone, so it's

easy to tune out. I think if you say that there is going to be a test at the end people would pay

more attention.”

Summary


stories, feelings, and perceptions of their E-learning experience at a small, fast food restaurant.

The participants varied in age, race, gender, and level of education. Data saturation was achieved

at ten participants. This chapter provided a demographic overview of the participants, a summary

of the results, and a detailed analysis of the themes found.

Themes that emerged during the interview process included: prior experience influence

on E-learning, hands-on is preferred method of learning, learner preparation and support was

inconsistent, not sure why E-learning is used, assessment of the E-learning training, and

engagement improvements needed.

64

Chapter Five

Findings, Discussion, and Suggestions for Future Research

Chapter five presents a summary of the findings and conclusions drawn from the data that

was presented in chapter four, discussion of findings in relation to literature, limitations, the

implication of the findings for practice, recommendations for further research, and summary.

It is widely accepted throughout the literature that small businesses in the United States

are significant drivers of economic growth, job creation, and wealth (The U.S. Small Business

Administration, 2016; Mills, 2011). However, only about half of all small businesses survive five

years or longer and only about one-third survive ten years or longer (The U.S. Small Business

Administration, 2016), and the survivability rate of restaurants is the lowest of all small

businesses (Kim & Upneja, 2014). While studies have shown small business managers’

capabilities can play a significant role in the success or failure of a small business (Knotts, Jones,

& Udell, 2003; Watson, 2010), only a small number have focused on how they acquire these

capabilities and even fewer specifically on the role of E-learning in their training.

Summary of the Findings


stories, feelings, thoughts, attitudes, and perceptions of their E-learning experience at a small,

fast food restaurant. After conducting a qualitative content analysis of interview data from ten

management trainees, six themes emerged. The six themes are prior experience influence on E-

learning perception, hands-on is the preferred method of learning, learner preparation and

support were inconsistent, why is E-learning used, assessment of the E-learning training, and

engagement improvements needed.

65

The results of this qualitative research study answered the research questions:

1. What are the perceptions of E-learning by management trainees in a small, fast food

restaurant?

2. How does the preferred method of training affect perceptions of E-learning?

Theme 1: Design and Content Influence on E-learning Perception

The study revealed that participants with previous E-learning experience did not have an

important, if any, influence on their opinions of the Captain D’s online training. However, the

design and content of the online training was a significant factor that influenced their opinion of

both experiences. Several of the participants had negative previous online training experiences

due to content and design issues, but credited content and design as a contributing factor in their

positive experiences with the Captain D’s online training. Content and design were contributing

factors in the other participants positive previous and current online training experiences, and

others negative previous and current online training experiences. The design and content of the

online training systems were crucial factors that influenced participants perceptions.

Theme 2: Hands-on is the Preferred Method of Learning

All participants identified hands-on learning as their preferred method of learning, but

their definition of hands-on learning is more in line with on-the-job training. While many of the

participants identified the repetitive motion of doing things hands-on as a critical factor in the

retention of information, the benefits of having immediate access to an instructor or trainer to

answer any questions that might arise during their training was recognized as an important factor

in their preferred method of learning. Several of the participants addressed specifically how they

prefer hands-on learning over online training. It allows them to be critiqued by the instructor or

trainer in real-time and anything being done wrong can be immediately be corrected.

66

Theme 3: Learner Preparation and Support was Inconsistent

The study found inconsistencies in the way participants were prepared for the online

training and the support systems available in the event of a problem. One of the participants was

given an outline of the modules that would be covered, what to do in the event of a problem, and

the trainer stayed to make sure everything was working before walking away. In stark contrast,

another participant was given virtually no instructions and simply told how to access the training

modules and to complete them whenever they had time. Other participants had varying

experiences on learner preparation from being given an outline the day before on what they were

going to do the next day to just being pulled from their regular work and told to do this online

training. The explanations of support systems available varied from being encouraged to “stop

the module and come to find the trainer if there are any questions” to being told “to not ask

questions during the modules and wait until they were done with everything.”

Theme 4: Why is E-learning Used

Surprisingly, the question that participants had no answer for, took the longest time to

think about before answering, or appeared to be most frustrated trying to answer was “Why do

you think your company uses online training?” While the issues with learner preparation have

been documented, even those participants who felt very prepared for their online training

experience struggled with the question. In all, none of the ten participants had been told by the

company the rationale for using online training, why it was beneficial to them, or even why it

was advantageous to the company. The participants offered an assortment of answers that

followed a theme of paper conservation or appealing to different learning styles. Also, all ten

participants asked the researcher at the end of their interviews to provide the answer to this

question.

67

Theme 5: Assessment of the E-learning Training

Despite reportedly preferring hands-on learning, all participants found the content of the

online training relevant to their job functions and an overall benefit to the training program.

Again, content was an essential determinate in the assessment of the online training program.

The majority of participants found the ability to watch the entire process being done in detail and

then having the ability to revisit it later to be the most important advantage of online training. If

the process being shown was making hush puppies or cleaning a piece of equipment, the

modules being detailed, accurate, and concise were crucial factors cited by participants in their

assessment of the online training program. However, many of the participants pointed out many

areas of opportunity to improve E-learning engagement and motivation during the conversations.

Theme 6: Engagement Improvements Needed

Information gathered during conversations about the overall assessment of online training

and the final interview question, “What recommendations would you make to improve the future

success of online training”, yielded a common theme of engagement and motivation deficiencies.

A common idea amongst participants was the addition of a mastery quiz at the conclusion of

each module to make the experience more interactive, ensure information is being retained, and

to increase accountability. Several participants suggested adding some aspects of gamification to

make things more interactive and fun, but still to accomplish the goal of information mastery.

Several other participants suggested PowerPoint slides or some other type of handout that they

could follow along with as the information being shown on the online module. Lastly, several

participants addressed the issue of some modules being “boring,” and made suggestions for

content improvements to help increase engagement. They suggested the addition of real-world

68

scenarios of “ugly” customer service situations and the additional visual of seeing people

demonstrating what is being taught versus a monotone-narrated PowerPoint.

Limitations

Though this research study has produced findings that may help develop a greater

understanding of the factors that contribute to E-learning adoption in small, fast food restaurants,

there are some limitations to usefulness. The participants for this study were limited to

management trainees within this one fast food franchisee, and data were collected only from this

sample of new management trainees. There are new trainees at many other fast food restaurants

who were excluded from the study. Additionally, due to the small sample size, the diversity of

the participants might not reflect that of the general population.

Implication of the Findings for Practice

With the number of small businesses closing in on 30 million and accounting for 99.7

percent of U.S. employer firms, many human resource professionals will work for or at a small

business during their career (The U.S. Small Business Administration, 2016). The grim statistics

of small business survivability in the United States, and the importance small business managers’

capabilities can play in the success or failure of a small business, makes learning how these

capabilities are acquired valuable information for human resource professionals (Knotts, Jones,

& Udell, 2003; Watson, 2010). This study demonstrates the role E-learning plays in the

acquisition of those capabilities, the challenges E-learning possesses for learners, the importance

of organizational support, and the critical impact content has on E-learning adoption. A greater

understanding of the role E-learning plays in small business management training helps

instructional designers, human resource professionals, business owners, and other training and

69

development stakeholders in the continual improvement process of more efficient learning

transfer.

Based on the findings from this study, the following recommendations for practice are

offered. All recommendations for practice are directed towards E-learning instructional

designers, human resource professionals, business owners, and other training and development

professionals. It is recommended that:

1. E-learning training programs should be designed to ensure the learning style of hands-on

or tactile learners is being addressed. While this is a difficult challenge, the incorporation

of drag-and-drop activities, utilizing tapping, swiping, and motion controls in tablet-

based activities, point-and-click games, and interactive presentations are ways to address

the needs of hands-on or tactile learners.

2. Real-world scenarios should be a part of any E-learning training program. These real-

world scenarios should strive to include the actual objects, sounds, and equipment

learners will experience when possible. This approach allows learners to gain practical

knowledge and help provide a context for information they have learned.

3. The addition of a mastery quiz at the end of modules and gamification elements should

be considered to improve engagement, assist in identifying areas of deficiency, and as a

way to increase accountability.

4. Create an introductory module that will set learning objectives, explain learner benefits,

and describe support systems available to ensure that all learners are given the necessary

support information.

70

5. Simulation-based learning should be considered for tasks that pose a danger to the learner

(i.e., cooking with fryers, fryer maintenance, broiler use). This approach could be more

engaging than passively watching a video, and would allow learners to develop the

knowledge and skills needed for hands-on tasks in a safe environment.

6. The researcher believes the most important of all the suggestions is simply to listen to the

participants. A survey should be conducted at the end of the E-learning training to

evaluate the quality of the content, learner motivation, and recommendations for future

online training to help improve the content and design.

Recommendations for Future Research

Future research in understanding the perception of management trainees could include

the following:

1. The research for this study came from a small sample size. Future research should be

conducted with a larger sample size from multiple regions and include other small, fast

food franchises that use E-learning mentioned in the study such as McDonald's, Taco

Bell, and Burger King. Researchers who replicate this study could find sufficient

responses that may lead, ultimately, to Grounded Theory.

2. Future research could benefit from replicating the study using sizeable fast food

franchises and determining if the results are similar to small, fast food franchises.

3. It is also recommended that future researchers examine the questions in this study from

the perspective of employees and explore what those results reveal.

4. It would be valuable to compare single-unit operators with multi-unit operators.

Additionally, fast food employees might have opinions that are different from those of

the business owners.

71

5. The use of Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Training Evaluation Model to measure the

effectiveness and impact of the current training and again after E-learning improvements

are made. Return on Investment (ROI) for the organization can be measured through

increased production, fewer customer complaints, and reduced waste.

Summary

All ten participants in the study indicated they preferred hands-on to online training. It is

apparent from the findings of this study that E-learning was not the first choice for training by

any of the management trainees interviewed and merely the completion of a checkbox on their

training program. This could stem from a combination of hands-on learning being their preferred

method of learning, the lack of knowledge of why the participants were using online training, or

the lack of interactive tools in the current modules. The heartening news is that all participants

found some value in the online training, but there needs to be a proactive effort by the

organization and training staff to help with motivation and E-learning adoption issues. Time

spent investing in motivational and E-learning adoption activities could be helpful in making

online training more than a checkbox in a training program, but play a useful role in learning

transfer.

Recommendations gathered from this study indicate concerns by management trainees

about hands-on or tactile learning style being ignored in the online training. They further

indicated there was a lack of engagement activities in the online training that possibly resulted in

missing relevant information. The impact of how this result impacts the overall training program

is unknown, but it is certain the participants in this study found the online training left something

to be desired. How this organization responds to the participant recommendations could dictate

the success of their E-learning program.

72

References

Admiraal, W., & Lockhorst, D. (2009). E-learning in small and medium-sized enterprises across

Europe: attitudes towards technology, learning and training. International Small Business

Journal, 27(6), 743-767. doi:10.1177/0266242609344244

Agourram, H., Robson, B., & Nehari-Talet, A. (2006). Succeeding the implementation of e-

learning systems in a multicultural environment. International Journal of Learning,

13(3).

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in

the United States: ERIC.

Apulu, I., & Latham, A. (2011). Drivers for information and communication technology

adoption: a case study of Nigerian small and medium sized enterprises. International

Journal of Business and Management, 6(5), 51. doi:10.5539/ijbm.v6n5p51

Arora, R. (2012). A mixed method approach to understanding the role of emotions and sensual

delight in dining experience. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29(5), 333-343.

doi:10.1108/07363761211247451

Ashton, D., Felstead, A., & Storey, J. (1995). Human Resource Management: A Critical Text. In:

Routledge London.

Atkinson, P., & Delamont, S. (2010). SAGE qualitative research methods: Sage.

Bachman, K. (2000). Corporate e-learning: Exploring a new frontier. WR Hambrecht+ Co.

Beaver, G., & Lashley, C. (1998). Competitive advantage and management development in small

hospitality firms: The need for an imaginative approach. Journal of Vacation Marketing,

4(2), 145-160.

Becton, S., & Graetz, B. (2001). Small business? small minded? Training attitudes and needs of

the tourism and hospitality industry. International Journal of Tourism Research, 3(2),

105-113. doi:10.1002/jtr.298

Benninck, R. (2004). Implementing elearning from the corporate perspective. Online]

Knowledge Tree e-Journal. Available at: http://knowledgetree. flexiblelearning. net.

au/edition05/download/bennink. pdf [Accessed March 2011].

Berg, B. L. (2004). Methods for the social sciences: Pearson Education Inc, United States of

America.

Blocker, M. (2005). E-learning: an organizational necessity, White Paper. Available at: www.

rxfrohumanperformance.com (accessed 31 January 2006).

73

Bloomberg, L. D., & Volpe, M. F. (2008). Completing Your Qualitative Dissertation: A

Roadmap from Beginning to End: SAGE Publications. doi:10.4135/9781452226613

Blundell, R., Dearden, L., Meghir, C., & Sianesi, B. (1999). Human Capital Investment: The

Returns from Education and Training to the Individual, the Firm and the Economy.

Fiscal Studies, 20(1), 1-23. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5890.1999.tb00001.x

Boettcher, J., Cavanagh, G., & Xu, M. (2014). Ethical Issues that arise in Bankruptcy. Business

and Society Review, 119(4), 473-496. doi:10.1111/basr.12042

Bryan, J. (2006). Training and performance in small firms. INTERNATIONAL SMALL

BUSINESS JOURNAL, 24(6), 635-660. doi:10.1177/0266242606069270

Bryant, M. T. (2004). The portable dissertation advisor. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.

Burton-Jones, A., & Hubona, G. S. (2006). The mediation of external variables in the technology

acceptance model. INFORMATION & MANAGEMENT, 43(6), 706-717.

doi:10.1016/j,im.2006.03.007

Carruth, P. J., & Carruth, A. K. (2012). Using eLearning to build workforce capacity among

business professionals. American Journal of Business Education (Online), 5(6), 709.

Cavanaugh, C. S. (1999). The effectiveness of interactive distance education technologies in K-

12 learning: A meta-analysis.

Chang, V. (2016). Review and discussion: E-learning for academia and industry.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, 36(3), 476-485.

doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.12.007

Chang, V. (2015). The role and effectiveness of e-learning for the industry: Lambert.

Chawla, D., & Joshi, H. (2012). E-Learning Perception and its Relationship with Demographic

Variables: A Factor Analysis Approach. International Journal of Information and

Communication Technology Education, 8(4), 105-118. doi:10.4018/jicte.2012100109

Chen, H.-R., & Tseng, H.-F. (2012). Factors that influence acceptance of web-based e-learning

systems for the in-service education of junior high school teachers in Taiwan. Evaluation

and Program Planning, 35(3), 398-406. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2011.11.007

Chen, H.-J. (2010). Linking employees’e-learning system use to their overall job outcomes: An

empirical study based on the IS success model. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1628-

1639. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.005

Chen, S. C., & Elston, J. A. (2013). Entrepreneurial motives and characteristics: An analysis of

small restaurant owners. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY

MANAGEMENT, 35, 294-305. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.07.002

74

Cheng, S.-Y., Tsai, M.-T., Cheng, N.-C., & Chen, K.-S. (2012). Predicting intention to purchase

on group buying website in Taiwan: Virtual community, critical mass and risk. Online

Information Review, 36(5), 698-712. doi:10.1108/14684521211275984

Cheng, Y. M. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of e‐learning acceptance. Information

Systems Journal, 21(3), 269-299. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2010.00356.x

Chow, M. J., & Dunkelberg, W. C. (2011). The small business sector in recent recoveries.

Business Economics, 46(4), 214-228. doi:10.1057/be.2011.23

Clarke, A., Lewis, D., Cole, I., & Ringrose, L. (2005). A strategic approach to developing e‐

learning capability for healthcare. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 22(s2), 33-41.

Collins, C., Buhalis, D., & Peters, M. (2003). Enhancing SMTEs' business performance through

the Internet and e-learning platforms. Education + Training, 45(8/9), 483-494.

doi:10.1108/00400910310508874

Collinson, E., & Quinn, L. (2002). The Impact of Collaboration Between Industry and Academia

on SME Growth. Journal of Marketing Management, 18(3-4), 415-434.

doi:10.1362/0267257022872442

Conti, G. (2005). Training, productivity and wages in Italy. LABOUR ECONOMICS, 12(4), 557-

576. doi:10.1016/j.labeco.2005.05.007

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions.

Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research. Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative

and qualitative research.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of

Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer

Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8),

982-1003. doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982

Day, G. S. (1994). The capabilities of market-driven organizations. the Journal of Marketing, 37-

52. doi:10.2307/1251915

Daymont, T., Blau, G., & Campbell, D. (2011). Deciding between traditional and online formats:

Exploring the role of learning advantages, flexibility, and compensatory adaptation.

Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 12(2), 156.

75

Deijl, C., de Kok, J., & Essen, V.-V. (2013). Is small still beautiful? Literature review of recent

empirical evidence on the contribution of SMEs to employment creation: Deutsche

Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.

Derouin, R. E., Fritzsche, B. A., & Salas, E. (2005). E-Learning in Organizations. Journal of

Management, 31(6), 920-940. doi:10.1177/0149206305279815

Devins, D., Gold, J., Johnson, S., & Holden, R. (2005). A Conceptual Model of Management

Learning in Micro Businesses: Implications for Research and Policy. Education &

Training, 47(8-9), 540-551. doi:10.1108/00400910510633099

Dewhurst, H., Dewhurst, P., & Livesey, R. (2007). Tourism and hospitality SME training needs

and provision: A sub-regional analysis. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(2), 131-143.

doi:10.1057/palgrave.thr.6050037

Domegan, C., & Fleming, D. (2007). Market research in Ireland. Gill and Macmillan Ltd,

Dublin.

Donlevy, J. (2003). Teachers, technology and training: Online learning in Virtual High School.

International Journal of Instructional Media, 30(2), 117.

El-Gayar, O., Moran, M., & Hawkes, M. (2011). Students' Acceptance of Tablet PCs and

Implications for Educational Institutions. EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY,

14(2), 58-70.

European Commission. (2003). Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 Concerning the

Definition of Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises [Electronic Version]. Official

Journal of the European Union L 124, 36. Retrieved August 03, 2017, from http://eur-

lex.europa.eu/eli/reco/2003/361/oj

Eurostat. (2017). Your key to European statistics. Retrieved October 12, 2017, from

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/tin00149

Ferriman, N. (2013). The impact of blended e-learning on undergraduate academic essay writing

in English (L2). COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 60(1), 243-253.

doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.008

Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice:

Taylor & Francis.

Gilley, J. W., & Eggland, S. A. (1989). Principles of human resource development. Reading,

Mass: Addison-Wesley in association with University Associates.

Gilley, J., & Maycunich, A. (2000). Beyond The Learning Organization: Creating a Culture of

Continuous Growth and Development through State-of-the-Art Human Resource

Practicies. Basic Books (AZ).

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/tin00149

76

Gilley, J., Eggland, S., & Gilley, A. M. (2002). Principles of human resource development: Basic

Books.

Goolnik, G. (2002). E-learning for smaller rurally based businesses: A demand-led challenge for

Scottish educational institutions. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration,

5(2).

Gould, J. M. (2009). Understanding organizations as learning systems. Strategic learning in a

knowledge economy, 119-140.

Graham, C. M., & Jones, N. (2011). Cognitive dissonance theory and distance education: Faculty

perceptions on the efficacy of and resistance to distance education. International Journal

of Business, Humanities and Technology, 1(2), 212-227.

Graham, M. C., & Jones, N. (2011). Improving business performance with web 2.0 technologies.

Journal of Business Excellence, 2(1), 12.

Gray, C., & Mabey, C. (2005). Management development: key differences between smalll and

large businesses in Europe. INTERNATIONAL SMALL BUSINESS JOURNAL, 23(5),

467-485. doi:10.1177/0266242605055908

Grix, J. (2010). The foundations of research: Palgrave Macmillan.

Grollman, W. K., & Cannon, D. (2003). eLearning a better chalkboard: online learning has come

a long way in recent years, and as an established part of most corporations' training

infrastructures, it's poised for greater importance in the future. Financial Executive,

19(8), 45-48.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation: improving the usefulness of

evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches (1st ed.). San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Hamid, A. A. (2001). E-Learning: Is It the "E" or the Learning that Matters? Internet and Higher

Education, 4(3-4), 311.

Hankinson, A. (1994). Small Firms′ Training: The Reluctance Prevails. Industrial and

Commercial Training, 26(9), 28-30. doi:10.1108/00197859410065889

Harrison, J., MacGibbon, L., & Morton, M. (2001). Regimes of Trustworthiness in Qualitative

Research: The Rigors of Reciprocity. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(3), 323-345.

doi:10.1177/107780040100700305

Harting, K., & Erthal, M. J. (2005). HISTORY OF DISTANCE LEARNING. Information

Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 23(1), 35.

77

Hartley, J. (2004). Case study research. Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational

research, 323-333.

Headd, B., & United States. Small Business Administration. Office of, A. (2010). An analysis of

small business and jobs. Washington, D.C.: Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business

Administration.

Holtzman, D. M., & Kraft, E. M. (2011). Skills needed in the 21st century workplace: A

comparison of feedback from undergraduate business alumni and employers with a

national study.

Hope, K., Gagliardi, D., Marzocchi, C., Muller, P., Devnani, S., Peycheva, V., & Julius, J.

(2015). Annual report on European SMEs 2015/2016, SME recovery continues final

report: November 2016. Luxembourg: Publications Office. doi:10.2873/76227

Horton, W. K. (2000). Designing Web-based training: how to teach anyone anything, anywhere,

anytime. New York: Wiley.

Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. (2016). Key small business statistics–

June 2016. Retrieved from https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/061.nsf/eng/h_03018.html

Intan Maizura Abd, R., Mohd Juraij Abd, R., Bibi Noraini Mohd, Y., & Shaari, M. S. (2015).

THE IMPACT OF SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ON

CUSTOMER'S LOYALTY: EVIDENCE FROM FAST FOOD RESTAURANT OF

MALAYSIA. International Journal of Information, Business and Management, 7(4),

201.

Johnson, S. (2002). Lifelong learning and SMEs: issues for research and policy. Journal of Small

Business and Enterprise Development, 9(3), 285-295. doi:10.1108/14626000210438607

Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., & Kim, E. K. (2011). Online university students' satisfaction and

persistence: Examining perceived level of presence, usefulness and ease of use as

predictors in a structural model. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1654-1664.

doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.008

Kasraie, N., & Kasraie, E. (2010). Economies Of Elearning In The 21st Century. Contemporary

Issues in Education Research (CIER), 3(10), 57. doi:10.19030/cier.v3i10.240

Kim, K.-J., & Frick, T. W. (2011). Changes in Student Motivation During Online Learning.

Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 1-23. doi:10.2190/EC.44.1.a

Kim, S., & Upneja, A. (2014). Predicting restaurant financial distress using decision tree and

AdaBoosted decision tree models. ECONOMIC MODELLING, 36, 354-362.

doi:10.1016/j.econmod.2013.10.005

https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/061.nsf/eng/h_03018.html

78

Knotts, T. L., Jones, S. C., & Udell, G. G. (2003). SMALL BUSINESS FAILURE: THE ROLE

OF MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND PRODUCT CHARACTERISTICS. Journal of

Business and Entrepreneurship, 15(2), 48.

Kobe, K. (2007). The small business share of GDP, 1998-2004: SBA Office of Advocacy.

Konrad, A. M., & Mangel, R. (2000). The Impact of Work-Life Programs on Firm Productivity.

Strategic Management Journal, 21(12), 1225-1237. doi:10.1002/1097-

0266(200012)21:12<1225::AID-SMJ135>3.0.CO;2-3

Koutroumanis, D. A., Alexakis, G., & Dastoor, B. R. (2015). The Influence Organizational

Culture Has On Commitment in the Restaurant Industry. Small Business Institute

Journal, 11(2), 27.

Kumar, P., & Gulla, U. (2011). Corporate e-Learning: Possibilities, Promises, and Realities.

DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 31(3), 179-188.

doi:10.14429/djlit.31.3.987

Kylli, J.-P. (2005). The future of eLearning. a short history of eLearning and a look into the

future of computer mediated learning. On the Horizon.

Kyndt, E., & Baert, H. (2015). Entrepreneurial competencies: Assessment and predictive value

for entrepreneurship. JOURNAL OF VOCATIONAL BEHAVIOR, 90, 13-25.

doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2015.07.002

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75): Sage.

Lincoln, Y. S. E., & Denzin, N. K. E. (2003). Turning Points in Qualitative Research: Tying

Knots in a Handkerchief. Crossroads in Qualitative Inquiry Series. Los Angeles, CA:

American Sociological Association.

Long, L. K., & Smith, R. D. (2004). The role of Web-based distance learning in HR

development. Journal of Management Development, 23(3), 270-284.

doi:10.1108/02621710410524122

Lubit, R. (2001). Tacit knowledge and knowledge management: The keys to sustainable

competitive advantage. ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS, 29(3), 164-178.

Mack, L. (2010). The philosophical underpinnings of educational research.

McLean, G. N. M. L. (2001). If we can't define HRD in one country, how can we define it in an

international context? Human Resource Development International, 4(3), 313-326.

doi:10.1080/13678860126441

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and

implementation: John Wiley & Sons.

79

Mills, K. (2011, November 23). Support Your Local Businesses on "Small Business Saturday".

Retrieved April 20, 2018, from

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/11/23/support-your-local-businesses-

small-business-saturday

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning:

Cengage Learning.

Muhl, C. J. (2002). What Is an Employee-The Answer Depends on the Federal Law. Monthly

Lab. Rev., 125, 3.

Mulin, C., & Reen, H. (2010). Arkadin develops employee talent through e-learning. Strategic

HR Review, 9(5), 11-16. doi:10.1108/14754391011064374

Muller, P., Devnani, S., Julius, J., Gagliardi, D., & Marzocchi, C. (2016). Annual Report on

European SMEs 2015/2016–SME recovery continues. Contract number:

EASME/COSME/2015/012]. European Union.

Nadler, L., & Nadler, Z. (1992). Every manager's guide to human resource development (1st

ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Nafukho, F. M., Hairston, N., & Brooks, K. (2004). Human capital theory: implications for

human resource development. Human Resource Development International, 7(4), 545-

551. doi:10.1080/1367886042000299843

National Restaurant Association. (2011). Restaurants fuel job creation, according to National

Restaurant Association research. Retrieved from http://www.restaurant.org/News-

Research/News/Restaurants-fuel-job-creation,-according-to-Nation

National Restaurant Association. (2017). Facts at a Glance. Retrieved from

http://www.restaurant.org/News-Research/Research/Facts-at-a-Glance

OECD (2017), Entrepreneurship at a Glance 2017, OECD Publishing, Paris.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/entrepreneur_aag-2017-en

Omar, A., Kalulu, D., & Alijani, G. S. (2011). Management of innovative e-learning

environments. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 15(3), 37.

Park, S., Nam, M., & Park, U. (2008). The structural model of factors affecting e-learning use of

teachers in vocational high school. Journal of Agricultural Education and Human

Resource Development.

Park, S. Y., Nam, M. W., & Cha, S. B. (2012). University students' behavioral intention to use

mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of

Educational Technology, 43(4), 592-605. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01229.x

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/11/23/support-your-local-businesses-small-business-saturday

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/11/23/support-your-local-businesses-small-business-saturday

http://www.restaurant.org/News-Research/News/Restaurants-fuel-job-creation,-according-to-Nation

http://www.restaurant.org/News-Research/News/Restaurants-fuel-job-creation,-according-to-Nation

http://www.restaurant.org/News-Research/Research/Facts-at-a-Glance

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/entrepreneur_aag-2017-en

80

Park, Y., Son, H., & Kim, C. (2012). Investigating the determinants of construction

professionals' acceptance of web-based training: An extension of the technology

acceptance model. AUTOMATION IN CONSTRUCTION, 22, 377-386.

doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2011.09.016

Parnell, J. A., & Carraher, S. (2003). The Management Education by Internet Readiness (Mebir)

Scale: Developing a Scale to Assess Personal Readiness for Internet-Mediated

Management Education. Journal of Management Education, 27(4), 431-446.

doi:10.1177/1052562903252506

Parsa, H. G., Self, J., Sydnor-Busso, S., & Yoon, H. J. (2011). Why Restaurants Fail? Part II -

The Impact of Affiliation, Location, and Size on Restaurant Failures: Results from a

Survival Analysis. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 14(4), 360-379.

doi:10.1080/15378020.2011.625824

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,

Calif: Sage Publications.

Pauselli, E., & D'Atri, A. (2001). Distance learning for SME Managers. Industry and Higher

Education, 15(2), 117-123.

Perry, W. S. (1977). The Open University (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Popovici, A., & Mironov, C. (2015). Students’ perception on using eLearning technologies.

Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 180, 1514-1519.

QSR Magazine. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.qsrmagazine.com/contact

Ram, M., & Edwards, P. (2010). Industrial relations in small firms. Industrial relations: Theory

and practice, 3rd ed.(Chichester, Wiley), 231-252.

Reich, K., & Scheuermann, F. (2003). E-Learning challenges in Austrian SME’s. Retrieved

August, 16, 2007.

Rivera, M., DiPietro, R. B., Murphy, K. S., & Muller, C. C. (2008). Multi-unit managers:

training needs and competencies for casual dining restaurants. International Journal of

Contemporary Hospitality Management, 20(6), 616-630.

doi:10.1108/09596110810892191

Roca, J. C., & Gagné, M. (2008). Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the

workplace: A self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior,

24(4), 1585-1604. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.06.001

Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2003). Learning in the field: an introduction to qualitative

research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

https://www.qsrmagazine.com/contact

81

Rowden, R. W. (1995). The Role of Human Resource Development in Successful Small to Mid-

Sized Manufacturing Businesses: A Comparative Case Study. Human Resource

Development Quarterly, 6(4), 355-373. doi:10.1002/hrdq.3920060405

Ruiz, J., Mintzer, M., & Leipzig, R. (2006). The impact of e-learning in medical education.

ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 81(3), 207-212.

Ryu, K., & Han, H. (2010). Influence of the Quality of Food, Service, and Physical Environment

on Customer Satisfaction and Behavioral Intention in Quick-Casual Restaurants:

Moderating Role of Perceived Price. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 34(3),

310-329. doi:10.1177/1096348009350624

Schultz, T. W. (1961). Investment in human capital. The American economic review, 51(1), 1-17.

Schutt, R. K. (2011). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research: Pine

Forge Press.

Schweizer, H. (2004). E-Learning in Business. Journal of Management Education, 28(6), 674-

692. doi:10.1177/1052562903252658

Seale, C. (1999). The Quality of Qualitative Research. SAGE. doi:10.4135/9780857020093

Shale, D. (2003). DOES "DISTANCE EDUCATION" REALLY SAY IT ALL-OR DOES IT

SAY ENOUGH? A Commentary on the Article by Kanuka and Conrad. Quarterly

Review of Distance Education, 4(4), 395.

Sheikhshoaei, F., & Oloumi, T. (2011). Applying the technology acceptance model to Iranian

engineering faculty libraries. The Electronic Library, 29(3), 367-378.

doi:10.1108/02640471111141106

Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for Ensuring Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research Projects.

Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75. doi:10.3233/EFI-2004-22201

Shim, J. P., Dekleva, S., Guo, C., & Mittleman, D. (2011). Twitter, Google, iPhone/iPad, and

Facebook (TGIF) and smart technology environments: how well do educators

communicate with students via TGIF? CAIS, 29, 35.

Shroff, R. H., Vogel, D. R., Coombes, J., & Lee, F. (2007). Student e-learning intrinsic

motivation: A qualitative analysis. Communications of the Association for Information

Systems, 19(1), 12.

Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: methods for analysing talk, text, and

interaction (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif;London;: Sage Publications.

Solomon, M. R. (2009). Marketing: Real people, real decisions: Pearson Education.

82

Solomon, M. R., Marshall, G. W., & Stuart, E. W. (2011). Marketing Real People Real Choices

7th Edition: Prentice Hall.

Stalk, G., Evans, P., & Shulman, L. E. (1992). COMPETING ON CAPABILITIES - THE NEW

RULES OF CORPORATE-STRATEGY. In (Vol. 70, pp. 57-69). BOULDER:

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW.

Stone, I. (2010). Encouraging small firms to invest in training: learning from overseas: UK

Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES).

Storey, D. (2004). Evaluation of SME Policies and Programmes. Paper presented at the

documento preparado para Promoting Entrepreneurship and Innovative SMEs in a Global

Economy: Towards a more Responsible and Inclusive Globalisation Conference,

Estanbul, Turquía.

Storey, D. J., & Westhead, P. (1997). Management training in small firms ? a case of market

failure? Human Resource Management Journal, 7(2), 61-71. doi:10.1111/j.1748-

8583.1997.tb00282.x

Sun, P. C., Finger, G., & Liu, Z. L. (2014). Mapping the Evolution of eLearning from 1977-2005

to Inform Understandings of eLearning Historical Trends. Education Sciences, 4(1), 155-

171. doi:10.3390/educsci4010155

Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The new organizational wealth: managing & measuring knowledge-based

assets (1st ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F. (2001). Foundations of human resource development: Berrett-

Koehler Publishers.

Sweetland, S. R. (1996). Human Capital Theory: Foundations of a Field of Inquiry. Review of

Educational Research, 66(3), 341-359. doi:10.2307/1170527

Taylor, P. (2013). The effect of entrepreneurial orientation on the internationalization of SMEs in

developing countries.

Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (1991). Twenty Years of Research on College Students:

Lessons for Future Research. Research in Higher Education, 32(1), 83-92.

doi:10.1007/BF00992835

The U.S. Small Business Administration. (2014). Advocacy: The voice of small business in

government. Retrieved from

http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/FAQ_March_2014_0.pdf

The U.S. Small Business Administration. (2016). Frequently Asked Questions about Small

Business. Retrieved from https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/frequently-asked-questions-

about-small-business

http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/FAQ_March_2014_0.pdf

https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/frequently-asked-questions-about-small-business

https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/frequently-asked-questions-about-small-business

83

The U.S. Small Business Administration. (2017). About the SBA - Mission. Retrieved from

https://www.sba.gov/about-sba/what-we-do/mission

Thornton, J. C., & Byrd, J. T. (2013). Social responsibility and the small business. Academy of

Entrepreneurship Journal, 19(1), 41.

Tselios, N., Daskalakis, S., & Papadopoulou, M. (2011). Assessing the Acceptance of a Blended

Learning University Course. EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY, 14(2), 224-

235.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2016). Entrepreneurship and the U.S. economy. Retrieved from

https://www.bls.gov/bdm/entrepreneurship/entrepreneurship.htm

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2017). Industries at a Glance. Retrieved from

https://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag722.htm#workforce

United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on, F. (2011). APEC 2011: breaking down barriers,

creating economic growth : hearing before the Committee on Finance, United States

Senate, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, first session, March 31, 2011 (Vol. 112-450).

Washington, D.C.: U.S. G.P.O.

Unwin, D., & McAleese, R. (1989). The Encyclopaedia of Educational Media Communications

and Technology, 2nd edition, Derick Unwin and Ray McAleese, eds. 1988. Greenwood

Press, Inc., Westport, CT. 577 pages. ISBN: 0-313-23996-7. $125.00. Bulletin of Science,

Technology & Society, 9(4), 264-264. doi:10.1177/027046768900900456

Valdiserri, G. A., & Wilson, J. L. (2010). The study of leadership in small business

organizations: impact on profitability and organizational success. Entrepreneurial

Executive, 15, 47.

Watson, J. (2010). SME Performance: Separating Myth from Reality.

Webster, B., Walker, E., & Brown, A. (2005). Australian small business participation in training

activities. Education + Training, 47(8/9), 552-561. doi:10.1108/00400910510633107

Yallapragada, R. R., & Bhuiyan, M. (2011). Small Business Entrepreneurships In The United

States. Journal of Applied Business Research, 27(6), 117.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods, Applied social research methods

series. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Afacan, Y., & Erbug, C.(2009). An

interdisciplinary heuristic evaluation method for universal building design. Journal of

Applied Ergonomics, 40, 731-744.

Yin, R. K. (2015). Qualitative research from start to finish (Second ed.). New York: Guilford

Press.

https://www.sba.gov/about-sba/what-we-do/mission

https://www.bls.gov/bdm/entrepreneurship/entrepreneurship.htm

https://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag722.htm#workforce

84

Yrle, A. C., Hartman, S. J., & Yrle-Fryou, A. R. (2000). ECONOMIC FACTORS:

EXAMINING WHY SMALL BUSINESSES FAIL. Journal of Business and

Entrepreneurship, 12(3), 67.

Yusuf, N., & Al-Banawi, N. (2013). The Impact Of Changing Technology: The Case Of E-

Learning. Contemporary Issues in Education Research (CIER), 6(2), 173.

doi:10.19030/cier.v6i2.7726

Zhang, D., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2003). Powering E-Learning In the New Millennium: An

Overview of E-Learning and Enabling Technology. Information Systems Frontiers, 5(2),

207-218. doi:10.1023/a:1022609809036

Zhang, M., Macpherson, A., & Jones, O. (2006). Conceptualizing the learning process in SMEs -

Improving innovation through external orientation. INTERNATIONAL SMALL

BUSINESS JOURNAL, 24(3), 299-323. doi:10.1177/0266242606063434

85

Appendix A: Invitation to Participate

Dear Sir or Madam

My name is Anthony Longo, and I am a doctoral student from the Department of Rehabilitation,

Human Resources, and Communication Disorders at the University of Arkansas. I am writing to

invite you to participate in my research study about the perceptions of E-learning by

management trainees in a small fast-food restaurant. You're eligible to be in this study because

you have participated in the D’s Net E-learning training.

If you decide to participate in this study, you will be interviewed for approximately 45 minutes

to one hour about your perceptions of the D’s Net E-learning modules. There is no compensation

for participating in this study. However, your participation will be a valuable addition to our

research and findings could lead to a greater understanding of E-learning.

Remember, this is entirely voluntary. You can choose to be in the study or not. Also, you may

withdraw any time from the study. If you'd like to participate or have any questions about the

study, please email or contact me at [email protected] or 901-555-5555.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Anthony Longo


86

Appendix B: Informed Consent

Perceptions of E-learning by Management Trainees in a Small Fast-Food Restaurant

Consent to Participate in a Research Study

Principal Researcher: Anthony Longo

Faculty Advisor: Dr. Jules Beck

INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE

You are invited to participate in a research study about your perceptions of the E-learning

modules on D’s Net. You are being asked to participate in this study because you have recently

completed the E-learning modules in the management training program.

WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THE RESEARCH STUDY

Who is the Principal Researcher?

Anthony Longo

Address

Memphis, TN 38120

901-555-5555

Email [email protected]

Who is the Faculty Advisor?

Dr. Jules Beck

What is the purpose of this research study?

The purpose of this study is to investigate the perceptions of E-learning by management trainees

in a small, fast food restaurant.

Who will participate in this study?

Approximately 10 participants.

What am I being asked to do?

Participate in an approximately one-hour interview.

What are the possible risks or discomforts?

There are minimal risks in this study. Some possible risks include: not wanting to answer a

question during the interview. To decrease the impact of these risks, you can: skip any question

that you do not want to answer. You can stop participation at any time.

What are the possible benefits of this study?

If you decide to participate, there are no direct benefits to you. The potential benefits to others

are: restaurant owners and human resource practitioners may develop a better understanding of

management perceptions of E-learning.

How long will the study last?

Participate in an approximately one-hour interview.

87

Will I receive compensation for my time and inconvenience if I choose to participate in this

study?

You will have the satisfaction of contributing to our research and understanding of how E-

learning programs can improve resources available to small fast-food management.

Will I have to pay for anything?

No, there will be no cost associated with your participation.

What are the options if I do not want to be in the study?

If you do not want to be in this study, you may refuse to participate. Also, you may refuse to

participate at any time during the study. Your job will not be affected in any way if you refuse to

participate.

How will my confidentiality be protected?

All information will be kept confidential to the extent allowed by law and University policy and

the information will be recorded with a pseudonym. I will secure your information with these

steps: lock all paper data in a filing cabinet and lock the computer file with a password.

Will I know the results of the study?

At the conclusion of the study, you will have the right to request feedback about the results. You

may contact the Faculty Advisor, Dr. Jules Beck, [email protected] or Principal Researcher,

Anthony Longo, [email protected]. You will receive a copy of this form for your files.

What do I do if I have questions about the research study?

You have the right to contact the Principal Researcher, Anthony Longo or Faculty Advisor, Dr.

Jules Beck as listed below for any concerns that you may have.

Principal Researcher Faculty Advisor

Anthony Longo Dr. Jules Beck

[email protected] [email protected]

901-555-5555 479-555-5555

You may also contact the University of Arkansas Research Compliance office listed below if you

have questions about your rights as a participant, or to discuss any concerns about, or problems

with the research.

Ro Windwalker, CIP

Institutional Review Board Coordinator

Research Compliance

University of Arkansas

109 MLKG Building

Fayetteville, AR 72701-1201

479-575-2208

[email protected]





88

I have read the above statement and have been able to ask questions and express concerns, which

have been satisfactorily responded to by the investigator. I understand the purpose of the study as

well as the potential benefits and risks that are involved. I understand that participation is

voluntary. I understand that significant new findings developed during this research will be

shared with the participant. I understand that no rights have been waived by signing the consent

form. I have been given a copy of the consent form.

Participant: By signing this consent form, you indicate that you are voluntarily choosing to take

part in this research.

___________________________ ______________________________

_______________

Signature of Participant Printed Name Date

Statement of Consent to be Audiotaped:

I understand that audio recordings may be taken during the study to assist with the accuracy of

my responses. I understand that I have the right to refuse the audio recording and can still

participate in the study. I understand that the audio recordings will be destroyed following

transcription and that no identifying information will be included in the transcription.

___________________________ ______________________________

_______________

Signature of Participant Printed Name Date

89

Appendix C: IRB Approval

90

Appendix D: Interview Protocol and Questions

Interview Protocol and Questions

• The interviewer will review notes and protocol before each interview.

• Each interview will be digitally audio recorded where permission is granted by the

participant. The audio recordings will be destroyed following transcription; no

identifying information will be included in the transcription.

• Each interview is expected to last between 45 to 60 minutes.

• Interview Methodology:

o Interviews will allow for follow-up questions seeking clarification or examples

that will contribute to an in-depth investigation.

o Some follow-up questions will be used to stimulate interviewee memory.

o The interviewer will use a semi-structured question set containing basic

demographic and interview questions.

o Predetermined questions will be the same for all participants.

• Each interview session will be documented with the following:

o Pseudonym of the interviewee,

o Location of the interview,

o Date,

o Start time,

o Finish time,

o Any atypical events and occurrences that may affect outcomes.

91

Demographics

Gender:

• Male

• Female

Age:

• 20 – 29

• 30 – 39

• 40 – 49

• 50 – 59

• 60 – 69

Race:

• White

• Black or African American

• Asian

• American Indian

• Alaska Native

• Native Hawaiian

• Other Pacific Islander

Education:

• No formal educational credential

• High school diploma or equivalent

• Some college, no degree

• Postsecondary nondegree award

• Associate's degree

• Bachelor's degree

• Master's degree

• Doctoral or professional degree

92

Do you have any prior experience with online training?

• What did you like and dislike?

What is your preferred method of learning? Such as E-learning classes, on-site instructor-led

training, or hands-on learning?

• Why did you find it to be the most beneficial?

Did you participate in the online training on D’s Net?

How comfortable were you participating in this online training?

• What did you like and dislike?

• Did you feel adequately prepared to navigate the online modules?

• Are support systems available if you have questions or something is not working

correctly?

How convenient was it for you for you to participate?

Why do you think your company uses online training?

What types of technology do you personally use on a daily basis?

How do you feel about the content of your online training?

• Did you find it relevant to your job?

• How soon after the completion of a module would you practice it?

What is your overall assessment of online training as a tool to help you do your job better?

What recommendations would you make to improve the future success of online training?

93

Appendix E: Published Research

Published Small Business Research

Year Author(s) Country Number of

Employees

Turnover/Balance

Sheet/Revenue

Industry

1993 Lyles,

Baird,

Orris, &

Kuratko

United

States

< 500 1 million or more Retail,


services, food

service, and

construction

1997 Wong,

Marshall,

Alderman,

& Thwaites

England 25 to 500

both independent

firms and

autonomous

subsidiaries

1999 Kerr &

McDougall

Scotland < 50

2002 Matlay England < 50

Manufacturing and

service firms

2002 Rigg &

Trehan

England 10 to 30

2004 Ibrahim,

Angelidis,

& Parsa

United

States

< 500

2005 Webster,

Walker, &

Barrett

Australia

/ New

Zealand

<5 (majority)

up to 50

<$200,000 (42%)

$200,000 to

$500,000 (21%)

$500,000 and

greater (32%)

All 17 Australian and

New Zealand

Standard Industry

Classifications

2006 Sels, De

Winne,

Delmotte,

European

Union

10 to 100

94

Maes,

Faems, &

Forrier

2008 Coetzer &

Perry

New

Zealand

< 49

Manufacturing and

service firms

2011 Hargis &

Bradley

United

States

< 250

Retail,


services, food

service, and

construction

2011 Mbonyane

& Ladzani

Singapore < 200

Spaza shops,

restaurants, and

supermarkets

2013 Allen,

Ericksen, &

Collins

United

States

< 200 For-Profit Basic services,

professional services,

retail, construction,

and manufacturing

2014 Wan Hooi

& Sing

Ngui

Malaysian < 150 RM25 million Manufacturing and

service firms

2016 Tam &

Gray

Hong

Kong

< 100 people,

or < 50 non-

manufacturing

95

Appendix F: Advantages of E-learning

Advantages of E-learning

Advantages Description References

Flexibility and

convenience - anytime,

anywhere, and anyone

The business can efficiently

provide the most updated

training to any of their

locations, where employees

can access it at any time and

anyplace.

Batalla-Busquets & Pacheco-

Bernal (2013), Burgess and

Russell (2003), Chen (2008),

Chen & Tseng (2012),

Daymont & Blau (2011),

Faherty (2003), Fry (2001),

Gudanescu (2010), Newton &

Doonga (2007), Nisar (2002),

Shale (2003)

Cost savings The business can reduce

training expenses by

eliminating the travel costs,

facilities costs, and lost

opportunity costs of getting the

instructor and employees in

the same place at the same

time. Also, the materials costs

are less, and the fewer lost

employee hours of work.

Benninck (2004), Burgess &

Russell (2003), Chen (2008),

Chen & Tseng (2012), Faherty

(2003), Hurt (2008), Joo, Lim,

& Park (2011), Kasraie &

Kasraie (2010), Newton &

Doonga (2007), Nisar (2002),

Setaro (2000), Shale (2003),

Tarr (1998), Yusuf & Al-

Banawi (2013)

Self-paced and

personalized learning

Learners can complete the

training modules at their own

pace and review any materials

until they fully comprehend it.

The business has more control

over the learning process by

being able to customize the

learning materials.

Batalla-Busquets, et al. (2013),


Russell (2003), Chang (2016),

Chen (2008), Gudanescu

(2010), Hamid (2002), Horton

(2000), Newton and Doonga

(2007), Nisar (2002), Setaro

(2000)

96

Uniform content and

delivery

The training delivered will be

uniform among and reduce the

possibilities of

misinterpretations and content

being left out.


Russell (2003), Chang (2015),

Nisar (2002), Setaro (2000)

Just-in-time content,

modules updated quickly,

and permanent archive of

courses

E-learning allows businesses

to update training modules and

materials instantly across the

company. The constant

updating of information and

anytime, anywhere access

allows the modules to be

extremely valuable for just-in-

time learning. The modules are

then archived for review at a

later date.

Batalla-Busquets & Pacheco-

Bernal (2013), Chen (2008),

Faherty (2003), Gudanescu

(2010), Hamid (2002), Tarr

(1998)

Improvements in the

workforce and customer

satisfaction, employee

productivity

Learners can utilize case

studies, role-playing, coaching

and mentoring, discussion

boards, chat rooms, tutorials,

and other online sources that

give them practical knowledge

and confidence to perform

their job more efficiently.

Also, the online format allows

the learner to go back and redo

any mistakes without the

embarrassment of other

classmates seeing.


Russell (2003), Chen (2008),

Faherty (2003), Fry (2001),

Gwebu & Wang (2007),

Kramer (2007), Setaro (2000)

97

Appendix G: E-learning Challenges

E-learning challenges

Challenges Description References

Technical issues -

limited bandwidth,

Internet access, etc.

Limited bandwidth leads to

performance issues with sound,

video, and graphics, resulting in

an inadequate learning process

from the choppy video, missing

audio, and long download times.

Other areas do not have access to

broadband, or the cost is too

prohibitive.

Benninck (2004), Fry (2001),

Galusha (1998), Gudanescu

(2010), Schweizer (2004)

High development

costs

The development of E-learning

courses is the more time intensive

and costly than traditional to

develop. However, once the

front-end work is complete, the

course can be reused making

them much more cost effective to

maintain than traditional courses.

Benninck (2004), Berge &

Giles (2008), Chen (2008),

Nisar (2002), Omar, Kalulu, &

Alijani (2011)

Organizational support

- lack of knowledge,

commitment, and

quality courses

A lack of organizational support

in conducting a proper needs

analysis leads to poor

understanding of the system,

higher costs, and the potential of

an incompatible system. Without

proper staff allocated to

developing curriculum, the

training might not match

organizational needs.

Benninck (2004), Bolan

(2001), Fry (2001), Galusha

(1998), Gudanescu (2010),

Nisar (2002)

98

Impersonal, limited

social and personal

interaction, and lack

of feedback

Some learning materials and

styles still require human

interaction. These issues will

continue to lessen as E-learning

continues to advance. A primary

example of needing human

interaction can be seen in team

building activities and emotional

issues.

Donlevy, 2003, Fry (2001),

Galusha (1998), Gudanescu

(2010), Nisar (2002)

Fear of technology,

limited computer and

Internet knowledge

Some learners may have a fear of

technology that may require basic

computer training and continued

support to help overcome their

fears.

Chang (2015), Fry (2001),

Horton (2000), Gudanescu

(2010), Nisar (2002),

Schweizer (2004)

perceptions of e-learning by management trainees in a

Documents